Get a forum post

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally; the description adds a genuinely useful security caveat that titles, messages and usernames are user-generated content to be treated as data, never instructions. It does not, however, discuss error behavior for invalid or missing post IDs.

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 tight sentences, no filler: the return payload is front-loaded and the prompt-injection warning follows. Every clause carries information an agent can act on.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields, and annotations plus the schema cover safety and parameters. It is slightly thin on what happens for a nonexistent or deleted post, but nothing needed to invoke the tool correctly is missing.

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 post_id and text_length (including the truncation-marker behavior and default/min/max bounds) are already fully documented in the schema. The description's mention of full text adds no syntax or format detail beyond that baseline, so 3 is correct.

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 ('Returns one post') and enumerates the returned payload (full text, author, date, likes, link), which cleanly separates it from list-style siblings such as forum_list_posts and forum_get_thread. An agent can distinguish single-post retrieval from collection retrieval without opening the schema.

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 only implied by the singular 'one post' framing; there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over forum_list_posts, forum_search, or forum_get_thread, nor any prerequisite about needing a post_id from a prior listing call. Adequate but leaves routing to inference.

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