List LinkedIn posts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds the auth scopes, which is useful behavioral context, but it doesn't add detail on pagination, ordering, or open-world semantics beyond what annotations already provide. The description is consistent with the annotations.

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?

One sentence that states purpose and prerequisites without filler. The verb and resource are front-loaded, and the auth requirement is compactly appended.

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 list tool with 3 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and auth, but omits pagination parameter semantics and any indication of the returned post fields. The openWorldHint and readOnlyHint annotations cover safety, but the missing count/start explanation leaves some ambiguity for agents needing pagination.

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 only 33% – count and start have no descriptions in either schema or description. Only organization_id is described in the schema, and the description only alludes to it via auth scopes. The description fails to clarify what count and start mean for pagination.

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 ('Lists') and resource ('recent posts by an author'), and clarifies the default author ('yourself'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like linkedin_get_post (single post) and linkedin_create_post (write operation).

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 auth prerequisites (r_member_social vs r_organization_social) and mentions the default self behavior, giving clear context on when it can run. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the scope requirements act as a usage condition.

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