벨로그 최신 글

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safe read-only nature is covered. The description adds the global scope ('전체') and a browsing-oriented behavior, but does not disclose details like pagination behavior, time window, or result shape. This is acceptable given the strong annotation coverage.

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 short, front-loaded sentences. The first states the resource, the second gives the use case. No filler or 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 simple read-only list tool with good annotations and a clear schema for its two parameters, the description is complete enough. It does not describe return values, but no output schema exists and the purpose is straightforward. Pagination is implied by the cursor param and documented in the schema.

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 description does not discuss parameters, and schema coverage is 50%. However, both parameters are simple: 'limit' is self-explanatory with type/min/max/default in the schema, and 'cursor' already has a clear schema description ('이전 페이지 마지막 글의 id'). No additional meaning is needed beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Description clearly states it returns '벨로그 전체 최신 글' (all latest posts on Velog), and the phrase '지금 무슨 글이 올라오는지 훑을 때' provides a specific browsing purpose. It is distinguishable from siblings like velog_trending_posts and velog_search_posts, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 gives a clear usage context: use when skimming what posts are currently being published globally ('지금 무슨 글이 올라오는지 훑을 때'). It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools, but the context is strong enough to guide selection.

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