setup_check_facebook_connect
Check Facebook auth and first sync
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| connect_id | Yes | ||
| connection_context | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| message | No | ||
| retryable | No | ||
| support_ref | No |
Check Facebook auth and first sync
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| connect_id | Yes | ||
| connection_context | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| message | No | ||
| retryable | No | ||
| support_ref | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / then / properties / categoryAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / then / properties / expectedAdded value: +{
+ "type": "boolean"
+}Output schema / then / properties / failure_kindAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / then / properties / responsibility_hintAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / then / properties / routeAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / then / properties / user_visibleAdded value: +{
+ "type": "boolean"
+}Input schema / properties / connection_contextAdded value: +{
+ "pattern": "^mctx_v1_[0-9a-f]{64}$",
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / $defsAdded value: +{
+ "s0": {
+ "properties": {
+ "count": {
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "has_more": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "items": {
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "id": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "type": [
+ "null",
+ "string"
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "count",
+ "items",
+ "has_more"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "s3": {
+ "properties": {
+ "status": {
+ "enum": [
+ "requires_validation",
+ "awaiting_assets",
+ "blocked"
+ ],
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "summary": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "status",
+ "summary"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+}Output schema / else / properties / asset_refreshAdded value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "complete": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "created_at": {
+ "type": [
+ "null",
+ "string"
+ ]
+ },
+ "finished_at": {
+ "type": [
+ "null",
+ "string"
+ ]
+ },
+ "last_refreshed_at": {
+ "type": [
+ "null",
+ "string"
+ ]
+ },
+ "launch_readiness": {
+ "$ref": "#/$defs/s3"
+ },
+ "refresh_scope": {
+ "enum": [
+ "tenant",
+ "fb_user"
+ ],
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "refresh_summary": {
+ "properties": {
+ "failed_connections": {
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "label": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "reason": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "label",
+ "reason"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "failed_connections_count": {
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "failed_connections_has_more": {
+ "type": "boolean"
+ },
+ "launch_readiness": {
+ "$ref": "#/$defs/s3"
+ },
+ "observed_at": {
+ "type": [
+ "null",
+ "string"
+ ]
+ },
+ "routing_errors": {
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "scope": {
+ "enum": [
+ "tenant",
+ "fb_user"
+ ],
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "updated_assets": {
+ "properties": {
+ "ad_accounts": {
+ "$ref": "#/$defs/s0"
+ },
+ "businesses": {
+ "$ref": "#/$defs/s0"
+ },
+ "pages": {
+ "$ref": "#/$defs/s0"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "ad_accounts",
+ "pages",
+ "businesses"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "observed_at",
+ "scope",
+ "updated_assets",
+ "failed_connections",
+ "launch_readiness"
+ ],
+ "type": [
+ "null",
+ "object"
+ ]
+ },
+ "requested_scope": {
+ "enum": [
+ "tenant",
+ "fb_user"
+ ],
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "started_at": {
+ "type": [
+ "null",
+ "string"
+ ]
+ },
+ "status": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "task_ref": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "task_status": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "status",
+ "complete"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Output schema / else / properties / ready_scopeAdded value: +{
+ "enum": [
+ "onboarding_only"
+ ],
+ "type": "string"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful detail that it checks both auth state and 'first sync', but says nothing about polling behavior, idempotency, or what a failed check looks like. With annotations carrying the safety burden, this is a modest addition.
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 short sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. It is efficient, though so terse that the brevity borders on under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but the remaining burden is substantial: two undocumented parameters, no usage context, and no linkage to the setup flow's other steps. For a two-parameter setup verification tool, the description leaves too much to inference.
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% for both parameters, so the description carries the full burden and fails to compensate: it explains neither 'connect_id' (what identifier, where it comes from) nor 'connection_context' (an opaque mctx_v1_ token with a strict pattern). The agent learns nothing about the parameters beyond their names.
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 verb ('Check') and two resources ('Facebook auth and first sync'), so the agent knows roughly what is verified. However, it is terse and does not differentiate itself from the closely named sibling setup_check_channel_connect or explain how it relates to setup_begin_facebook_connect. Adequate but with a clear gap in sibling differentiation.
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?
There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no reference to the alternative setup_check_channel_connect or setup_begin_facebook_connect. The agent must infer that this is a post-begin-connect verification step.
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.