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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and non-destructive, so the description need not re-prove safety. It adds useful context about the account-level scope and the requirement that the account be connected, but it does not disclose details such as auth requirements, rate limits, or response shape.

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 with no filler. It delivers the core action and scope immediately.

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 and no parameter descriptions, the description leaves important context unspecified, such as what analytics metrics are included, what the response series looks like, and how this differs from post-level or demographic analytics. It is minimally sufficient but not complete for an agent making an informed tool selection.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for parameter meaning. It only vaguely references 'a date range', leaving platform, accountId, and date format details to inference. The schema itself provides patterns and enums, but the description adds almost no semantic guidance beyond that.

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 states a clear verb ('Return'), a specific resource ('account-level analytics series'), and a scope ('connected social account over a date range'). The term 'account-level' distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_post_analytics and get_follower_demographics.

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 gives clear context: use this tool when you need account-level analytics for a social account over a date range. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state exclusion cases, so it stops short of a 5.

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