instagram_likers

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), and the description adds meaningfully beyond them: it discloses that results are only 'a sample' of likers rather than the full list, that a total like count is also returned, and it states a concrete cost of 3 credits. It still doesn't say how large the sample is or whether pagination is possible.

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?

Two short sentences with the core purpose front-loaded, followed by the cost line. No filler or redundancy, though the sampling caveat could have been folded into the first sentence more tightly.

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 must carry return-value detail. It does state that a sample of accounts plus a total like count is returned, which is the key caveat, but it omits sample size and pagination behavior — relevant gaps for an agent deciding how to consume the result.

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 100%, so both url and shortcode are already fully documented in the schema, including the 'pass this or shortcode' guidance. The description adds nothing parameter-specific, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 accounts that liked an Instagram post.' This clearly distinguishes the liker list from siblings like instagram_comments or instagram_post, though it never explicitly names or contrasts those siblings.

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?

Usage is implied by the resource description (you call it when you need a post's likers), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g. public account required), and no reference to any alternative tool for related data.

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