velog_list_posts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation and recency ordering, but does not disclose authentication needs, pagination behavior, error handling, or any side effects. The basic read nature is clear, but little else is.

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 sentence that conveys the core purpose with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately short and front-loaded, making it easy to parse.

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 output schema, no annotations, and minimal parameter documentation, the tool description is not complete enough for an agent to invoke it confidently. Missing details include the response shape, whether authentication is required, and how the 'limit' parameter behaves.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It indirectly clarifies that 'account' is the author of the posts, but it says nothing about 'limit' or its default behavior. This leaves one of the two parameters effectively undocumented.

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 ('조회합니다' = retrieves) and resource ('해당 계정이 쓴 최근 글 목록' = recent posts written by that account). This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools like velog_list_accounts, velog_create_post, and velog_login.

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 only states what the tool does. There is no guidance about when to use it versus alternatives, whether prior login via velog_login is required, or how to obtain the account name. An agent gets no context for choosing this tool over other operations.

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