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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly states captions-only search, cosine similarity ranking, min query length, and the Instagram-first platform scope. It does not mention errors, pagination, or authentication, but the core behavioral traits are disclosed beyond what the schema alone shows.

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?

Three sentences with no filler. The core action and examples are front-loaded, and the critical limitation (captions only) is bolded and placed early. Every sentence contributes to agent understanding.

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?

The description gives a solid overview of purpose and limitations, but with no output schema it does not explain the shape of returned matches beyond 'top matches by cosine similarity.' It also leaves behavior around filters (accountId, mediaType) and limit handling implicit, so the agent has to infer those from parameter names and enums.

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 0%, so the description should compensate by explaining parameters. It covers query semantics ('Searches captions only', 'Min 3-character query') but says nothing about limit, accountId, or mediaType filtering, leaving most parameters semantically unexplained.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'semantic search across captions of media published.' It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_published_media and search_tags by emphasizing semantic search over captions, and clarifies scope with 'Instagram first.'

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 concrete use cases ('find posts about our spring sale', 'the reel I made about onboarding') and an explicit exclusion ('image-content search ... out of scope for v1'). It lacks explicit alternatives such as 'use list_published_media for listing all media,' but the context is clear enough for an agent to choose it appropriately.

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