See who reposted a post

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the result is a list of accounts rather than repost objects, but does not disclose pagination details or response envelope, which is acceptable given the schema documents cursor/limit.

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 a single concise sentence with no filler or redundancy. While it is a noun phrase rather than a full verb phrase, the title supplies the action and the description stays tightly scoped.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should ideally clarify what the response contains; 'The accounts that reposted a specific post' does this at a high level. It does not mention that results are paginated or that account selection can affect the view, but the schema already documents the account and pagination parameters.

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 covers all four parameters with descriptions (uri, limit, cursor, account), so the schema carries the parameter documentation burden. The description only reinforces that uri points to a 'specific post', adding no new parameter-level meaning.

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 identifies the resource (accounts) and the relationship (reposted) for a single post, and the title adds the verb 'See'. It is distinct in intent from sibling tools like get_post_likes and get_quotes, though it does not explicitly contrast them.

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?

Usage is implied: call this when you need the accounts that reposted a specific post, given a URI. There is no explicit guidance about when to prefer it over alternatives or when not to use it, but the sibling names and the 'specific post' phrasing provide reasonable context.

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