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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered by structured data. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the required analytics.read permission, that results include posts discovered on connected accounts with null postId, and that ranking is descending.

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-loaded with what the tool returns and how it differs from the sibling, then packs coverage, scoping and permission notes into a compact paragraph. Slightly dense but no sentence is wasted.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and the description covers permissions, data coverage (AdaptlyPost vs. discovered posts), scoping via connectionIds, and the ranking default. Nearly complete for a 7-parameter read tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so defaults, enums, limits and ISO formats are already fully documented in the schema. The description only restates connectionIds narrowing and the default VIEWS metric, which the schema already states, so it adds little beyond the baseline.

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+resource (top-performing posts ranked by one metric) and precisely distinguishes it from the sibling list_post_analytics by noting it returns 'the same rows ... without pagination'. An agent can pick the right tool without opening either 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 a concrete triggering example ('what were our top 5 posts this month') and names the alternative it shadows (list_post_analytics without pagination), so the selection is clear. It stops short of an explicit 'do not use when' condition, e.g. when you need the full paginated dataset.

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