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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It reveals that results are ranked by engagement metrics and filtered by date range, but it does not address sorting direction, defaults, permissions, rate limits, or whether any filtering or mutation side effects occur.

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?

A single focused sentence that states the resource, selection logic, and temporal scoping without filler. It is maximally concise for the information it conveys.

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?

Given five parameters prescriptions, no annotations, and no output schema, a one-sentence description leaves critical gaps: default date ranges, metrics syntax, account scoping, and response shape. This is under-specified for an agent to invoke reliably.

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 0%, so the description must clarify the five parameters, but it only implies date filtering and engagement-based ranking. It does not explain metrics format, limit semantics, or account_ids behavior.

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 uses a specific verb with a clear resource: 'Get top performing posts by engagement metrics for a date range.' It clearly conveys the operation and selection criterion, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools like get_post_metrics or list_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?

No guidance is given about when to choose this tool over siblings such as get_post_metrics, list_posts, or get_stats_overview. The description implies a use case for ranking posts, but there are no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative-selection cues.

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