opentweet_list_evergreen_posts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, confirming a safe read operation. The description adds behavioral context by clarifying that the list contains 'source posts that will be automatically reposted on rotation', which goes beyond the annotation. No disclosure of pagination or rate limits, but the core behavioral trait is well-covered.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the main action, zero wasted words. Every sentence earns its place, providing purpose and behavioral detail.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should compensate by explaining return value structure. It only states 'Shows all source posts' without detailing fields or pagination. Given parameter complexity (4 params) and no output schema, this is insufficient for complete understanding.

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% for all 4 parameters (page, limit, paused, x_account_id), each with adequate descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, 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 'List posts in your evergreen pool' with an explanatory follow-up ('Shows all source posts that will be automatically reposted on rotation'). It uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('evergreen pool'), distinguishing it from siblings like opentweet_list_tweets (general listing) and opentweet_get_evergreen_post (single 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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like opentweet_list_tweets or opentweet_get_evergreen_post. While the purpose implies usage for viewing the evergreen pool, it does not provide exclusions or context for when the sibling tools might be more appropriate.

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