get_post

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only says 'Get', hinting at a read operation, but does not state side-effect-free behavior, authentication needs, error behavior, or response characteristics.

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?

'Get a post by URN.' is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. For a one-parameter read tool, this is appropriately concise.

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?

The tool is simple and has an output schema, so the description does not need to explain return values. However, with no annotations and no usage guidance, the description lacks enough behavioral and selection context to be fully complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. 'by URN' tells the agent that post_urn is the identifier used to select the post, adding some meaning beyond the raw schema, but it does not provide format details, examples, or where the URN comes from.

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 states the verb ('Get'), resource ('post'), and selection mechanism ('by URN'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like create_post, delete_post, and list_comments by signaling a single-item read operation.

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 gives no guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as linkedin_get or when not to use it. It implies the obvious context — retrieving a post by URN — but offers no exclusions or comparisons.

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