list_reader_posts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that each post is 'summarised' and includes 'read state and reading progress,' which goes beyond the tool's name. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior, error conditions, or permissions—though it is clearly a read 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and ends with an actionable pointer to the sibling tool. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains what is returned (summaries, read state, progress) and points to the tool for full content. It could mention explicit ordering (e.g., 'newest first'), but 'recent' implies recency, making this largely 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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage for both parameters (after and limit) with clear descriptions. The tool description adds no parameter-specific detail beyond what the schema already conveys, so the baseline 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 tool's function with a specific verb ('List'), a resource ('posts'), and a scoped context ('publications this account subscribes to — the reader Inbox'). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_posts and get_reader_feed by referencing the reader Inbox and explicitly naming get_reader_post as the tool for reading a single post.

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 provides clear context for use (reader Inbox) and explicitly mentions an alternative ('use get_reader_post to read one'). It does not explicitly exclude other sibling tools like get_reader_feed, but the reader Inbox framing makes the appropriate usage clear.

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