get_community_posts

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

The description clearly states read-only behavior, that auth is injected server-side, that calls are throttled and retried on 429/5xx, and how non-2xx responses surface as tool errors. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations, and does not contradict readOnlyHint or idempotentHint.

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 well-structured with labeled sections and front-loaded with the endpoint and read-only signal. It is slightly redundant with 'read-only' appearing both in the header and the Behavior section, but every other sentence serves a purpose.

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 tool with six optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential call semantics: filtering behavior, sorting, pagination, authentication, throttling, retries, and error responses. An agent has enough information to invoke the tool correctly and understand the result envelope.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds value by explaining that multiple query params are combined with an AND operator and that pagination is done by walking pages with `page` and sizing with `items_per_page`. This goes beyond the individual parameter descriptions.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get community posts' via GET /v2/community/posts. It clearly explains what the returned list contains, the sort order, and pagination, which distinguishes it from singular/other community tools like get_community_post.

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?

It explicitly provides a 'Use when' section: 'safe to call speculatively for lookups and reporting.' It also states what the tool is not for: 'Not for changing anything — use the matching 🟡 write tool,' and lists related Community tools, giving the agent clear routing guidance.

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