get_post

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose the return content well (summary, key_points, howto, links, folders, tags). However, it says nothing about permission requirements, behavior when post_id is unknown/invalid, or any rate limits, so key behavioral traits remain undisclosed.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that leads with the verb and resource and then lists return contents; every clause carries information. The parenthetical enumeration is dense but not wasteful.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description partly compensates by detailing what is returned, which is genuinely useful. It still omits how to obtain post_id and what happens on a missing/invalid post, which an agent needs for reliable invocation.

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% for the single required post_id parameter, and the description never mentions the parameter at all. It adds no meaning about where post_id comes from (e.g., from search_posts or list results) or its expected format, so the parameter is undocumented in both places.

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?

States a specific verb ('Return') and resource ('one post') and enumerates the content categories returned (metadata, deep-read knowledge, folders, tags). It implicitly distinguishes itself from sibling search_posts by scoping to a single post, though it never names the sibling explicitly.

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: call this when you have a post_id and need the full record for that post. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no mention of alternatives such as search_posts for discovery, leaving the routing decision to inference.

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