get_page_albums

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It signals a read-only list operation via GET, which is non-destructive, but it does not mention authentication needs, pagination behavior, or error cases. Minimal but not misleading.

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?

A single short sentence front-loads the core purpose and adds the endpoint in parentheses without any filler. Every word earns its place.

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?

For a simple list operation with an output schema, the core action is stated and return structure is presumably covered by the output schema. However, with no annotations and minimal parameter documentation, authentication, pagination, and how to supply page_id remain implicit. It is minimally adequate but not 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not document any of the three parameters. The endpoint path hints at page_id, but after and limit are left entirely unexplained aside from their titles and defaults. The description does not compensate for the schema gap.

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 ('List'), a specific resource ('photo albums'), and scoping ('on the Page'), plus the exact GET endpoint. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_page_photos and get_page_posts.

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 clear context: use this tool when you need to list photo albums on a Page. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the use case is unambiguous enough for an agent to select it correctly.

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