User Posts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful context beyond that: paid credit consumption, the confirm=true gate, the unauthenticated access limit to public figures, and a clarification that the read-like POST does not publish to the platform. It notably addresses why a non-readOnly tool is still non-publishing.

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?

Four tight sentences, front-loaded with what is fetched and returned, followed by pagination, access constraints, and cost/confirmation notes. No sentence is 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 six-param fetch tool with no output schema, the description enumerates the return fields, documents pagination and trim, states the auth limitation, and discloses cost plus the confirm=true requirement. Everything an agent needs to call it correctly is present.

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 baseline is 3 per the rubric. The description mentions pagination via next_max_id and the trim option for lighter responses, but this largely restates what the schema already documents, adding little new semantic detail.

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 (Fetches), resource (posts), and scope (from a Truth Social user, paginated list), and enumerates the returned fields. An agent can distinguish it from the sibling truth_social_post (single post) and truth_social_profile (profile) without opening a 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?

Gives clear operating context: only prominent public figures (e.g., Trump, Vance) are accessible without authentication, and confirm=true is required because the call may consume paid credits. It does not explicitly name an alternative sibling for when a single post (truth_social_post) is wanted, so it stops short of full when/when-not routing.

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