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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safe read nature is covered. The description adds useful context about returned metrics and platform scope, but it also claims date-range filtering even though the schema only exposes platform, limit, and offset. This creates a misleading behavioral expectation beyond the structured schema.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the core action and metrics, and avoids unnecessary verbosity. However, the unsupported date-range claim is clutter and slightly undermines the otherwise crisp structure.

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 core purpose and metric set are present, and annotations cover the safety profile. But with no output schema, the description does not describe the response shape or pagination behavior, and it lacks guidance on how it differs from get_analytics_daily. The false date-range capability also leaves the tool less complete than it appears.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description does not add meaningful parameter semantics beyond the schema. It adds a 'date range' filter option that is not represented as a parameter, which could cause an agent to supply an invalid argument. Limit and offset are not mentioned in the description, so no extra value is provided there.

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 clear action and resource: getting social media post performance analytics with specific metrics (views, likes, comments, shares) and platform scope through Post Bridge. It is reasonably distinct from siblings like list_posts or get_analytics_daily, though it does not explicitly contrast with get_analytics_daily. The mention of a date-range filter is misleading because no such parameter exists in the schema.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_analytics_daily or sync_analytics. The description implies it is for post-level performance analytics, but does not state when not to use it or which sibling covers daily aggregates. An agent must infer the usage boundary.

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