Get quoted posts

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It clearly states a critical behavioral trait: the cursor is not advanced. It also indicates this is for 'reading later', adding context beyond the basic operation.

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?

Description is a single, clear sentence that front-loads the key action. No unnecessary words, but could be slightly more structured (e.g., separate clauses for clarity).

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and only 2 parameters, the description is reasonably complete. It explains the core functionality and a key behavioral nuance. However, it could mention behavior when no cursor is set or what the return format looks like.

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 descriptions already cover 100% of parameters with clear explanations (e.g., since_id overrides cursor). The tool description does not add significant new information about parameters beyond what schema provides.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves quoted posts and source content after a previously confirmed cursor, and explicitly notes the cursor is not advanced. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'commit_cursor' which likely advances the cursor.

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?

Description implies usage for reading later without advancing cursor, but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid this tool, nor mention alternatives beyond the sibling tool name.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.