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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full behavioral burden, and it does add a genuinely useful warning that results are user-generated Instagram content to be treated as untrusted input. However it omits other behavior an agent needs: auth requirements, pagination, ordering, and what a business account record actually contains.

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 short sentences, no filler, with the security-relevant warning placed prominently second. Every clause earns its place.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should carry more of the load for a 6-parameter query tool. It covers the trust caveat but says nothing about return shape, result ordering, or cost, leaving real gaps that the rich schema only partially fills.

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 schema already explains exact, limit, category, has_email, has_phone, and meta_category in depth. The description adds only 'by category', which restates rather than extends the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Get business accounts') plus the filter dimension ('by category'), which lets an agent identify it as a category-filtered user list. It does not explicitly contrast itself with neighbors like search_users or get_users_by_location, but the resource and filter are unmistakable.

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?

No statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, no exclusions. The only routing hint (call list_business_categories first) lives in the schema for the category param, not in the description.

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