opentweet_get_evergreen_post

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

The annotation already declares the tool as read-only. The description adds value by specifying that it returns 'full details' and 'recent publishing history', which is not covered by the annotation. No contradictions.

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 12-word sentence that is front-loaded and contains no extraneous information. Every word is necessary and earns its place.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately states what is returned (full details + publishing history). Combined with the annotation, the tool is fully understandable.

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 schema covers the single parameter 'id' with a description ('The evergreen post ID'), achieving 100% coverage. The description does not add further semantics, so baseline 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 clearly states the action ('Get full details'), the resource ('specific evergreen post'), and adds a distinguishing feature ('including its recent publishing history'). This differentiates it from siblings like list or history-only tools.

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 usage for retrieving full details of a specific post but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare to similar sibling tools. The context from sibling names helps, but the description itself lacks direct guidance.

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