Get the growth stats of one of the org's own connected accounts (My Accounts): followers/views history snapshots, breakthrough count, and its top posts by views.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| account | Yes | Account to inspect (username, display name or id from list_my_accounts) | |
| platform | No | Disambiguates when the same username exists on both platforms | all |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds useful scoping and output content, but does not mention behavioral details such as rate limits, authentication requirements, or potential data staleness.
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 description is a single well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose and then lists the key output categories. There is no redundant wording or 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?
For a two-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool returns and for which accounts. Parameter details are fully handled by the input schema, and no critical usage gap remains.
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?
The input schema fully documents both parameters: account accepts a username, display name, or id from list_my_accounts, and platform disambiguates identical usernames. Since schema coverage is 100%, the tool description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already provides.
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 verb ('Get') and resource ('growth stats of one of the org's own connected accounts') and lists the concrete output content: followers/views history, breakthrough count, and top posts by views. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_dashboard_stats, list_my_accounts, and list_my_account_posts.
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 clearly scopes the tool to individual 'My Accounts' belonging to the org, which separates it from watchlist or dashboard-level tools. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or say when not to use it, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to route correctly.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a distinct target resource/action, and the descriptions are unusually explicit about differences (e.g., 'Distinct from the watchlist', 'Separate list from list_tags'). A few pairs are still easy to confuse without careful reading: delete_folder vs delete_folders differ only by singular/plural, and the three download-URL tools (get_post_download_url, get_asset_download_url, get_my_account_post_download_url) plus the category/tag families require attention to pick correctly.
The snake_case verb_noun pattern is followed consistently throughout (list_*, get_*, create_*, update_*, delete_*, set_*, tag_*). Minor deviations: archive_folder and archive_my_accounts also perform restore despite their names, delete_folder/delete_folders split one operation by cardinality, and tag_posts/tag_my_account use a different verb style than the set_* family for metadata mutations.
At 56 tools, this far exceeds the 25+ threshold for 'too many,' even though the server spans multiple subdomains (watchlist, analysis, assignments, folders, my accounts, assets, Drive, categories/tags). Obvious consolidation candidates exist — delete_folder/delete_folders, the three download-URL getters, and the parallel list_my_account_* listers — and the sheer surface is heavy for an agent to navigate.
Core workflows are thoroughly covered with no dead ends: watchlist → analyze → assign → folder → track → approve has full lifecycle support, including reversible archive vs permanent delete choices. Minor gaps exist but are work-aroundable: no create/update for my accounts or models (app-side OAuth/admin only), no way to delete a viral post or a post note, and asset upload only happens in the app.
