get_media_insights

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It adds useful context about the metrics override, feed-post defaults, and Reels/stories metric differences. It does not mention authentication, error behavior, or rate limits, so it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 core purpose front-loaded and the metric caveat placed directly afterward. It contains no filler, repetition, or irrelevant detail.

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 output schema covers return-value shape, and the description provides the key selection cue that this is per-post rather than account-level analytics. The main gap is the lack of explicit guidance on the optional account parameter, but this is minor for a simple read-only analytics tool.

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%, so the description needs to clarify parameters. It explains the metrics parameter well, including comma-separated overrides and media-type differences, but it leaves the account parameter and media_id format undocumented beyond the schema's type information.

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 identifies the tool as returning per-post analytics and lists the relevant metrics, which distinguishes it from account-level siblings like get_account_insights and get_audience_insights. It lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'list,' but the phrase 'Per-post analytics' is unambiguous.

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 when to use this tool by emphasizing 'per-post' analytics and notes that defaults suit feed posts while Reels/stories need explicit metrics. However, it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state when to prefer another tool, leaving the selection logic somewhat inferred.

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