Post

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

Adds substantial context beyond annotations: credit consumption, the confirm=true safety requirement, media-download credit cost, auth restrictions on which posts are reachable, and the clarification that read-like POST requests do not publish. This resolves the non-obvious readOnlyHint=false annotation rather than contradicting it.

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?

Front-loads the core action and return fields, then layers options and caveats in a logical order. Slightly dense but every sentence carries useful information (return shape, options, auth, credits) with no filler.

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?

For a single-post fetcher with no output schema, the description compensates by listing the returned fields and covering auth, credits, and confirmation constraints. Remaining gaps (error handling, pagination/limits) are minor.

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%, so the schema already documents url, account, confirm, and download_media (including credit costs). The description reinforces confirm and download_media meaning but adds no syntax or format details beyond what the structured fields already supply, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fetches a single Truth Social post by URL') and enumerates the return payload, distinguishing it from siblings like truth_social_user_posts and truth_social_profile. An agent can identify the correct tool without opening the schema.

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?

Provides clear situational context: posts from prominent public figures are accessible without auth, download_media=true for media, and confirm=true required. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools (e.g., when to use this vs truth_social_user_posts for bulk posts), so it stops short of full when-to-use/alternative routing.

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