List post analytics

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds real value beyond them: it explains that canTakeDown is informational and that taking a live post down is a user action in Markaestro, not delete_post — a genuinely useful safety clarification absent from the annotations.

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?

One dense paragraph that is front-loaded with the row-level scope before drilling into source, sort, and pairing advice. Every clause is informative, though the canTakeDown parenthetical is slightly tangential to a listing tool.

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 8 optional parameters and no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned metrics and clarifies window/source/scoping behavior. It leaves channel and the explicit since/until pairing mechanics to the schema, a minor gap for an otherwise well-covered tool.

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 coverage is high (88%), so the baseline is 3. The description goes modestly beyond the schema by explaining productId scoping (connection brand vs. all-brands workspace vs. named brand) and by giving interpretive meaning to the sort options ('to find what worked'), which the schema merely enumerates.

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 (list) and resource (post analytics) with precise scope: every post in the window with its latest metrics, one row per post, sorted. It lists the returned metric set and clarifies the markaestro/native source distinction, letting an agent separate it from get_post (full caption/media) and get_post_analytics_history without opening a 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?

Gives concrete usage direction: use sort=engagements or sort=views to find what worked, sort=published_at for a chronological read, and pair with get_post for caption/media of a Markaestro post. It lacks an explicit when-not-to-use against get_analytics or get_post_analytics_history, but the context provided is strong.

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