telemost_post

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavior: 'Paid per call in USDC from your wallet (see telemost_catalog for the price).' This cost disclosure is valuable and goes beyond the structured annotations.

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 core purpose, followed by a cost warning. Every sentence adds value; there is no fluff or repetition.

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?

The description covers the main function and cost, but lacks parameter semantics and expected response format. With no output schema and two parameters (one with an enum), the agent needs more details on how to specify the post and region. It is adequate but has clear gaps.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It does not explain what 'post' expects (URL, ID, username) nor what 'region' ('cis' vs 'worldwide') means. The mention of 'a single post' in the description gives minimal context, but not enough for correct invocation.

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 ('Measure') and resource ('a single post') with clear scope: 'statistics over time, views, forwards and reactions.' This distinguishes it from siblings like telemost_posts_search or telemost_stats_engagement, which focus on discovery or broader engagement metrics.

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?

It provides clear context: 'Measure how a specific post performed.' This implies use when you need post-level analytics. However, it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or name sibling tools for other use cases, so it stops short of a 5.

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