ghost_get_post

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get full details and content' without revealing important traits like return format nuances (despite the format parameter), authentication needs, error behavior for non-existent posts, or rate limits. This is a significant gap for a tool that could have complex response structures.

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?

A single, clear sentence that front-loads the action and resource. It avoids unnecessary words and is perfectly sized for the tool's simple purpose, making it easy for an agent to scan and understand.

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 tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description is the only source of behavioral context. It does not explain the structure of the returned content (e.g., whether tags, authors, or metadata are included), nor does it discuss how the format parameter affects the output. While adequate for a basic fetch, it leaves important details that could impact correct invocation or interpretation.

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 provides 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for both idOrSlug and format, including an enum for format. The description adds no additional parameter-level context beyond what the schema already explains, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'full details and content of a single Ghost post', and the identifier parameter 'by its ID or Slug'. It effectively differentiates from siblings like ghost_list_posts (which returns multiple) and ghost_get_page (which targets pages), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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?

The description implies usage for fetching one specific post but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternatives such as ghost_list_posts for multiple posts or ghost_get_page for pages. There is no explicit routing guidance, though the 'single' wording gives a subtle cue.

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