skool_posts_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds value by specifying the return fields (title, content preview, author, likes, comment count) and mentioning filtering/pagination support. However, it does not elaborate on pagination mechanics, rate limits, authentication, or error behavior, which limits transparency.

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?

The description is highly concise: three sentences that are front-loaded with the exact purpose, followed by key features and return data. Every sentence contributes useful information without redundancy or fluff.

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 read-only list operation with four optional parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete: it states the resource, features, and return fields. It falls short only in not detailing pagination behavior (e.g., page size, total count) or error scenarios, which is a minor gap for a tool of this simplicity.

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 the baseline is 3. The description’s mention of 'category filtering and pagination' adds only marginal meaning beyond the existing schema descriptions for the parameters. No significant new parameter semantics are provided.

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?

The description clearly states 'List posts in a community feed' with a specific verb and resource, and highlights supporting features like category filtering and pagination. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like skool_posts_get (single post retrieval) and skool_posts_create.

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?

The description implies that this tool is for listing posts in a community feed, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as skool_posts_get or skool_posts_create. There is no mention of exclusions or alternative tool names.

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