social-research-mcp

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It mentions results are 'saved to the local timeline database' which adds some behavioral context about persistence, but doesn't cover rate limits, authentication needs, error conditions, or what happens with duplicate content. For a scraping tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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?

Two sentences that efficiently convey the core functionality and outcome. The first sentence covers the what and how, the second explains the persistence behavior. No wasted words, though it could be more front-loaded with critical information.

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?

For a scraping tool with 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is adequate but has clear gaps. It covers the basic action and persistence behavior but doesn't address error handling, rate limits, authentication, or how results are structured. The 100% schema coverage helps, but behavioral aspects are under-specified.

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 schema already documents all 5 parameters thoroughly. The description adds marginal value by mentioning the three search approaches (URL, hashtag, keyword) which maps to the first three parameters, but doesn't provide additional context beyond what the schema already specifies.

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 ('scrape posts') and resource ('Instagram'), specifying multiple search methods (URL, hashtag, keyword). It distinguishes from some siblings by focusing on Instagram, but doesn't explicitly differentiate from other scrape_* tools beyond platform name.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like scrape_facebook or timeline_query. The description mentions saving to 'local timeline database' but doesn't explain when that's preferable or how this differs from other scraping tools in the sibling set.

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