get_post

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. 'Retrieve' signals a non-destructive read operation, but no additional behavioral traits (e.g., error behavior, required permissions) are disclosed. It is a minimal but clear indication of read-only intent.

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?

Single sentence, grammatically correct, immediately front-loads the action and target. No superfluous words.

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?

Given the simple single-parameter design and the presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers the core behavior. However, it lacks any explicit guidance on usage context or edge cases, making it adequate but not outstanding.

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 schema offers no description for url_or_id, leaving the description to explain that an integer represents an ID and a string is a URL. This adds meaningful interpretation to the parameter's polymorphic nature.

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 uses the specific verb 'Retrieve' with resource 'Doctor of Credit post' and identifies the access method 'by ID or URL,' clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_recent_posts or search_posts.

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 when the caller already has a post ID or URL, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives or mention any exclusions. No comparison to siblings is given.

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