ig_get_insights

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that not all metrics apply to all media types, which is useful, but does not describe error behavior, rate limits, or response format. The metric compatibility note adds value beyond a simple 'get' statement.

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 two short sentences plus a list, all front-loaded with the core purpose. Every line adds value: the metrics list and the media-type caveat are useful, and there is no fluff.

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 tool is simple with two parameters and no output schema. The description covers the input semantics reasonably well but does not explain the response structure or what happens when unsupported metrics are requested. Given the lack of annotations, some additional context (e.g., return format) would make it more complete.

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?

The schema has zero description coverage, so the description must compensate. The list of common metrics adds meaning to the 'metrics' parameter, but the 'media_id' parameter is not explained (though its name is self-explanatory). The description does not define exact metric formats or constraints beyond examples.

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 tool gets insights for an IG media post, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ig_get_account_insights (account-level) and insights_get by explicitly specifying media post context.

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 provides clear context: it is for IG media post insights, listing common metrics and noting that different media types support different metrics. This implies when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state exclusions.

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