Search posts

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

Annotations already mark the operation read-only, non-destructive, open-world, and idempotent. The description adds meaningful auth-related behavior: it requires a connected account and notes that Bluesky's public API refuses this endpoint, which is a real-world constraint an agent needs before calling.

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 dense, front-loaded sentences: the core purpose comes first, followed by a compact operator list and auth caveat. No filler or repetition of schema fields.

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 read-only search tool with 8 parameters, the schema plus description covers the required query, optional filters, account selection, pagination ('Pages automatically'), and the auth caveat. Even without an output schema, the return value is self-evident from 'search across public posts'.

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 adds value by enumerating the accepted query operators (from:, to:, mentions:, domain:, since:, until:, lang:, quoted phrases), which the schema only gestures at with 'Operators like from:alice.bsky.social work inside it'.

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 opening phrase 'Full-text search across public posts' names a specific verb (search) and resource (public posts), and the operator list distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_actors and search_feeds. It unambiguously identifies what the tool returns: matching 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 use for keyword/operator search on public Bluesky posts and warns that a connected account is required, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over sibling search tools or when not to use it. The prerequisite is clear, yet alternative-selection guidance is left to inference.

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