list_posts

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

With no annotations and a terse description, the tool fails to disclose behavioral traits like read-only nature, pagination behavior (implicit in schema), or any side effects. The description carries the full burden but offers no insight beyond the verb.

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 extremely concise with no redundant words. However, it borders on under-specification; a sentence or two more would enhance usability without sacrificing conciseness.

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 has 4 parameters, no required fields, and an output schema, the description is minimally viable. It lacks contextual hints about features like pagination, filtering, or ordering (present in schema) but the schema compensates partially. The description could be more informative for a complex tool.

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 input schema already provides complete descriptions for all 4 parameters (100% coverage). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema conveys, thus meeting the baseline expectation without providing extra value.

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 the action (list) and resource (blog posts), making the primary purpose obvious. It distinguishes from sibling list tools like list_pages or list_labels. However, it lacks any additional context about scope or filtering, leaving room for ambiguity about what 'list' entails.

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 versus alternatives such as get_post, list_pages, or search-related tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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