social_get_influencer_posts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'get recent posts' and does not clarify what 'recent' means, return format, pagination, ordering, or any limitations. For a read operation this is a notable gap but not misleading.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to conveying the tool's purpose. It is appropriately concise for a tool with two simple parameters.

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?

This is a low-complexity tool with full schema coverage, so the description is nearly sufficient. However, there is no output schema and no mention of what fields, ordering, or pagination the returned posts will have, leaving some ambiguity about what the caller actually receives.

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%, with handle described as 'Twitter/X handle' and limit as 'Number of posts'. The tool description adds no further semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get recent posts from a specific influencer' clearly states the verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from siblings like social_get_influencer (which likely returns profile data) and social_get_trending_posts (which is not specific to one influencer), though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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: this tool is for retrieving posts from a known, specific influencer. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over related tools like social_get_feed or social_get_trending_posts, and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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