instagram_audio

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), so the description's job is to add context beyond that. It does so by disclosing the credit cost ('Cost: 1 credit') and the shape of the returned data (title, artist, duration, preview URL, reels), which are not derivable from the annotations or schema.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and then the return contents and id provenance. The middle sentence is somewhat list-like but each element earns its place; nothing is padded.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns, and it does list the key fields plus the associated reels. Cost is disclosed and the id source is given, so an agent has enough to invoke it correctly; only the absence of an explicit alternative-tool route keeps it from being fully 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema documents 'Numeric audio id', so baseline is 3. The description adds genuine value by stating the provenance of the id ('Audio ids come from reels'), which tells the agent where to obtain a valid value – information the schema does not provide.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get an Instagram audio track and the reels using it') and even enumerates the returned fields, so the agent knows this is an id-based lookup rather than a search. It does not explicitly name the closest sibling (instagram_audio_search), so sibling differentiation is left partly implicit.

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?

'Audio ids come from reels' implies the prerequisite for calling this tool and the context in which it applies. There is no explicit when-not guidance or pointer to instagram_audio_search for the case where the agent has no id yet, so usage is only partially covered.

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