get_user_posts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that count is a per-page target, and that the tool will automatically paginate while preserving user parameters until the requested count is met or results are exhausted. This is meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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?

The description is two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant information.

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?

Given 7 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the crucial pagination behavior but does not clarify how to identify the user (user_id, share_text, or sec_user_id) or require one of them. However, the schema descriptions for those parameters partially compensate, making the description reasonably complete for the core use case.

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. The description adds semantics for count (single-page target) and clarifies cursor usage in auto-pagination, which goes beyond the schema's field descriptions. Other parameters are adequately covered by 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 clearly states the tool retrieves a list of a user's public posts, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_user_profile and get_comments by focusing on content list retrieval.

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 provides a clear pagination protocol (auto-continue with next_cursor when has_more=true), but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives like social_search or get_content_detail. There are no exclusions or alternative tool references.

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