instagram_reels_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds useful context: the 3-credit cost and that results are paginated via cursor. It does not describe the return shape, rate limits, or result volume, so it exceeds the annotation baseline only modestly.

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 middle sentence 'Reels matching a keyword' is a pure restatement of the first and earns no place. The cost line is genuinely useful, and the description is short, but the redundancy drags it below a clean score.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should ideally sketch the return payload; it does not. It does cover pagination and cost, and the annotations carry the safety profile, making it minimally viable but not complete for a search 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 100%, so both parameters (q, cursor) are fully documented in the schema, making 3 the baseline. The description's 'Page with cursor' echoes the cursor param without adding syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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 first sentence states a specific verb and resource ('Search Instagram reels by keyword'), which is clear enough for an agent to act on. However, it does not distinguish this tool from siblings like instagram_reels or instagram_search, which is a meaningful ambiguity given the crowded toolset.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus instagram_reels (list reels) or instagram_search (general search). The keyword-based nature is implied but no conditions, alternatives, or exclusions are stated.

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