Get List Posts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds only the trivial detail that posts are 'recent', but does not disclose pagination or other behavioral nuances beyond what the schema (limit) already implies.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. Every word earns its place, delivering the essential action, resource, and scope.

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 is simple, has good annotations, and the schema covers parameters and output format (via response_format). The description adequately covers the main use case; lack of output schema is mitigated by the response_format enum and the nature of the 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 100% and the schema descriptions are self-explanatory. The tool description adds no extra meaning to parameters, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate when the schema handles parameter documentation.

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 a specific verb ('get') and resource ('recent posts from a specific list'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like x_get_list (which likely returns list metadata) and x_get_list_members. The scope is tightly defined by 'by its ID'.

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 context is clear: use this tool when you need posts from a specific list. It does not explicitly name alternatives or emphasize when not to use it, but the purpose statement itself provides sufficient context for selection.

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