get_posts

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 does not state that this is a read-only operation, nor does it explain pagination defaults, response format, or how filters combine. The schema lists parameters, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the tool's name and a one-line summary.

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 a single, concise sentence that conveys the core purpose without redundancy. It is front-loaded and efficiently communicates the key functionality, though it is somewhat sparse.

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?

The tool has 8 parameters and no output schema, but the schema fully documents all parameters. The description lacks information about return value structure, default behaviors (e.g., default limit, sort order), and how multiple filters interact, leaving room for inference but not critical gaps.

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?

The input schema provides descriptions for all 8 parameters, achieving 100% schema_description_coverage. The description does not add any semantic meaning beyond what the schema already offers, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the action (get), resource (posts), and scope (from a specific Canny board). It effectively differentiates the tool from siblings like get_post (retrieves a single post) and search_posts (likely searches across boards).

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 usage for fetching posts from a specific board with optional filtering, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives such as search_posts or get_post. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided.

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