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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, closed-world and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond them: only actual platform numbers are reported, unshared metrics are omitted, and posts under a day old are still accumulating. It stops short of describing result ordering or shape.

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 usage trigger is front-loaded and every clause carries information about either scope or data quality. It is a single dense sentence, but the caveats about missing numbers and young posts are worth their length.

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, the description must convey what comes back, and it lists the metrics plus the conditional Instagram follower delta. A one-parameter, read-only tool is well covered; only return formatting and aggregation details are left implicit.

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% and the single `days` parameter already documents its default and 1-30 bounds. The description's '7 by default, up to 30' restates the schema rather than adding meaning such as what a wider window does to counts. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the work.

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 names a specific outcome (per-post reach, likes, comments, saves, shares, plus Instagram follower change) scoped to posts 'Suara published for them'. This distinguishes it in practice from sibling list tools like get_my_posts, but it never names those siblings or my_instagram_insights, so differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

There is an explicit trigger: 'Use this when the signed-in owner asks how their posts did'. The window defaults to 7 days and caps at 30, giving the agent a clear calling condition. There is no exclusion guidance, e.g. what to call for account-level or non-Instagram metrics.

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