search_facebook_pagesSearch Facebook pages by keyword. Returns page name, URL, profile image and verification status. Pass a page URL to facebook_page_details for its IDs and full profile. Billed $0.008 per page.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pages | No | Number of pages to fetch (1-15, default 1). Billed per page. | |
| query | Yes | Search keyword (max 500 characters) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / properties / pages / descriptionPrevious value: -"Number of pages to fetch (1-10, default 1). Billed per page."New value: +"Number of pages to fetch (1-15, default 1). Billed per page."Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover the read-only/open-world safety profile, so the lower bar applies. The description adds genuinely useful behavioral context the annotations don't: the exact return fields (name, URL, profile image, verification status) and the $0.008 per-page billing cost.
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 tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then return fields, then routing, then cost. Every sentence earns its place with 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?
With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the returned fields, and it covers routing and pricing. Comprehensive for a two-param search tool; only minor gaps around result limits or pagination.
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%, so the schema already documents both 'query' and 'pages' with ranges and billing notes. The description's mention of keyword search and per-page billing adds marginal value but no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.
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 (Search) and resource (Facebook pages) with scope by keyword, which cleanly distinguishes it from the many search_facebook_* and facebook_page_* siblings. An agent knows immediately what this retrieves.
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?
Provides clear follow-up routing: pass a page URL to facebook_page_details for IDs and full profile, which signals this is the discovery step. However, it gives no explicit when-not guidance versus overlapping search tools like search_facebook_posts.
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.