List Ghost post summaries with NQL filters and pagination to find drafts, published posts, or tagged content by status, tag, or order.
List posts (summaries only). Supports Ghost NQL filters and pagination.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number | |
| limit | No | Results per page (max 100) | |
| order | No | Sort order, e.g. "published_at desc" | |
| filter | No | Ghost NQL filter, e.g. "status:draft" or "tag:recipes+status:published" |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a meaningful trait beyond the schema — results are summaries, not full post bodies — and notes pagination support. However, it says nothing about auth requirements, whether a total count is returned, or default result-set size.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope, with zero filler. Every clause carries information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple read-only list tool with a fully documented schema, the description covers what the tool returns (summaries) and what it supports (filters, pagination). With no annotations and no output schema, additional context on auth needs, default page size, or result shape would have helped, so it is adequate but not complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented with defaults, bounds, and examples (NQL filter syntax, sort order format), which sets the baseline at 3. The description's mention of "Ghost NQL filters and pagination" loosely maps to filter/page/limit/order but adds no syntax or constraints beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb and resource ("List posts") and adds a distinguishing scope note ("summaries only") that separates it from posts_read. It does not name the sibling it excludes, but the browse-vs-read distinction is inferable from the description alone.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Usage is implied rather than stated: "List posts (summaries only)" suggests this is for enumerating posts, and the summary qualifier hints at the posts_read alternative. There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative, and no mention of pagination defaults or ordering behavior.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.