socials_diagnostics

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

There are no annotations, so the description must disclose behavior. It mentions that refresh=true bypasses the cache and force-refreshes from PostHog, but it doesn't state whether the tool is read-only, whether it has side effects, or what the authentication requirements are. This is insufficient for a diagnostic tool.

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 sentences, with the main action in the first sentence and parameter usage in the second. It is concise, front-loaded, and contains no filler.

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 one optional parameter, but without an output schema the description should explain the return structure or provide more context. It lists the categories of diagnostics but does not describe the shape of the response or any preconditions. Combined with the lack of behavioral details, the description is only partially 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 input schema already describes the refresh parameter with the same information ('Force refresh feature flags from PostHog (bypasses cache)'). The description repeats this without adding new meaning, so it scores at the baseline of 3 given 100% schema coverage.

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 retrieves diagnostics information including health metrics, engagement score, and feature flags. It uses a specific verb ('Get') and identifies the resource, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like socials_health_check, so it gets a 4.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as socials_health_check. It only explains the refresh parameter, which is about parameter usage, not tool selection. Thus, the agent is left without direction on choosing this tool over others.

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