Search your posts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scope details—only own, published posts and title/body search—but it does not disclose return format, result ordering, pagination, or matching behavior. This is acceptable but not exceptional.

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, focused sentence with no filler or redundancy. The verb, scope, and target fields are front-loaded, allowing an agent to quickly understand the tool's purpose and core behavior.

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 search tool with a fully documented schema and safety annotations, the description covers the essential selection criteria and query scope. Minor details such as result ordering or exact matching semantics are omitted, but they are not necessary for an agent to invoke the tool correctly in most cases.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the schema already explains all three parameters (query, limit, publication). The description adds a small increment by clarifying that query searches both title and body, but it does not need to expand further because the schema carries the parameter documentation burden.

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 ('Search') and resource ('your own published posts') and specifies that the search spans title and body. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like research_creator_posts or search_publications, which operate on other creators' or public content.

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 establishes a clear usage context: use this tool when the agent needs to find posts the user has already published. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when-not-to-use, but the 'own published posts' qualifier is sufficient to guide tool selection among the many siblings.

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