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. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond that: it discloses the returned payload (metrics plus platform post ids) and that refresh triggers a slower external fetch from the platforms. No auth or rate-limit notes, but it exceeds the annotation bar.

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?

Two sentences, purpose front-loaded, parameter guidance second. Every clause carries information and there is no 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?

Complete on the essentials: read-only safety comes from annotations, returned values are enumerated since there is no output schema, and refresh behavior is explained. The one meaningful omission is sibling differentiation in a crowded analytics namespace.

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 all three parameters are documented, and the description's refresh note largely restates what the schema already says ('Fetch fresh metrics... slower'). Baseline 3 is appropriate since the description adds little beyond the structured fields.

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 and resource ('Get views, likes, comments and shares for one post') and scopes it to a single Breakreach post, plus notes it returns platform post ids. However, it gives no differentiation from closely related siblings like get_post_insights or get_content_performance, leaving the agent to guess which one to pick.

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 only guidance is a parameter hint ('Set refresh to pull fresh numbers from the platforms first'), which tells how to use refresh but not when to use this tool versus get_post_insights, get_content_performance, or get_analytics. Given the dense cluster of similarly named analytics siblings, the absence of any when/when-not routing is a real gap.

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