Read one post

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

Annotations already convey read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to repeat those. It adds value by enumerating the returned fields (text, media, permalink, topic tag, link attachment, quoted post, has_replies), which explains the tool's behavioral output beyond what annotations and schema provide.

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 one sentence, front-loads the core behavior ('One Threads post by its numeric id'), and packs the return-field list efficiently without repetition. Every phrase contributes context.

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 single-record retrieval tool with rich read-only and idempotent annotations, the description plus schema covers what an agent needs: the id source, the account context, and the expected response fields. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by the explicit field enumeration.

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 describes both parameters (id and account) at 100% coverage, so the schema already carries the parameter documentation. The description only repeats 'numeric id' and does not add new semantic details about the parameters beyond the schema.

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 (a single Threads post) and the selection method (numeric id), and lists the full field set, which distinguishes it from collection-style tools like get_posts. It relies on the title for the verb 'Read', so it is clear but not maximally self-contained.

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 this tool is for retrieving exactly one post when you already know its numeric id, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer it over siblings like get_posts or get_replies. No alternative guidance or exclusion criteria are provided, so usage is only implied.

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