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

No annotations are provided, leaving the description to carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the search scope and optional location filtering, but does not mention return format, pagination, rate limits, cost (beyond what the schema says), or whether this is a read-only operation. The agent is left guessing about key behavioral aspects.

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 exactly two sentences: the first states the core purpose, the second adds an optional scoping capability with a helpful reference. There is no redundant or filler content, and key information is front-loaded.

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 tool has 7 parameters and no output schema, yet the description is minimal. It does not explain what the returned posts contain, how pagination (pages parameter) impacts results, or the cost implications that the schema only hints at. For an agent to fully assess the tool, more contextual detail is needed.

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 every parameter is already described in the input schema. The description's mention of location_id and the pointer to search_facebook_locations adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema. It satisfies the baseline but does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 clearly states the action ('Search Facebook posts by keyword') and the scope ('across all of Facebook'), distinguishing it from siblings like search_facebook_pages and search_facebook_videos by specifically targeting posts. It also notes the optional location scoping, which adds precision.

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 a concrete usage hint: use search_facebook_locations to resolve a location_id for scoped results, giving an explicit path for a common need. However, it does not contrast with other Facebook search tools (pages, videos, etc.), so broader usage differentiation is implied rather than stated.

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