pages_photos

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions pagination behavior ('Use cursor to get next page of results'), which is useful, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or what 'recent' means (e.g., time frame). This leaves significant gaps for a read operation.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences that directly convey the tool's purpose and key behavioral trait (pagination). Every word earns its place, and it's front-loaded with the core functionality.

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 the tool has 0 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose and pagination, but lacks details on return values (e.g., photo format, metadata) and other contextual factors like authentication or limits, which are important for a read operation.

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 input schema has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so no parameter documentation is needed. The description adds value by explaining the cursor-based pagination mechanism, which compensates for the lack of parameters in the schema. This justifies a score above the baseline of 3.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Read') and resource ('page photos'), and specifies the scope ('from recent'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'profiles_photos' or 'pages_posts', which might handle similar photo-related operations.

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 implies usage for paginated reading of recent photos via cursor-based navigation, but doesn't provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'profiles_photos' or 'page_reels'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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