get_postFetch basic post details from a Circle community by post ID; optionally choose a named private account to supply credentials.
Show Basic Post. Reads community data.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| account | No | Named private Circle account; selects credentials, not a remote community ID. | |
| post_id | Yes | Post ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so safety is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that — no auth requirements, no scoping (e.g., which community the post belongs to), no error behavior, no note on what 'basic' excludes.
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?
It is short and front-loaded, but the second sentence ('Reads community data') carries no informational weight. Brevity here reflects under-specification rather than disciplined 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?
With no output schema, the description should convey what post fields are returned and what 'basic' means versus the summary sibling. It provides none of that, leaving the agent unable to anticipate the response for a read 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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, with post_id and the account credential-selection nuance both documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema.
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 restates the title ('Show Basic Post') with a generic tagline ('Reads community data'), which is essentially a tautology. While 'get_post' indicates a retrieve-a-post operation, nothing distinguishes it from siblings like get_post_summary, list_posts, or get_image_post.
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?
There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative-selection guidance at all. The agent has no basis for choosing get_post over list_posts or get_post_summary.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.