post_status

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, informing the agent of safe, non-destructive behavior. The description adds no further behavioral information beyond what is already in the schema and annotations, such as rate limits, error conditions, or response format details.

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 sentence without any extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the key action and resource, making it efficient for the agent 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, read-only), the description is minimally adequate but does not fully specify what 'status' entails or what the response looks like. For example, it could mention that the status includes publication state or timestamps. The absence of this information reduces completeness.

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 coverage is 100%, and the parameter description 'Post ID from post.publish response' already provides context. The tool description only repeats 'by post ID' without adding new meaning or clarifications about the parameter's usage or constraints.

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 'Get status of a published post by post ID' clearly states the action (Get), the resource (status of a published post), and the input (by post ID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like post_publish (publish), post_delete (delete), and post_stats (stats), which have different purposes.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs. alternatives. For instance, it does not mention that the post_id comes from post.publish, which is implied only in the schema. There is no explicit context like 'Use after publishing to check status' or 'Not for unpublished posts.'

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