get_instagram_post

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations by specifying that the data is raw and fresh, and enumerating the exact content types (coauthors, tagged users, paid partnership metadata, etc.), which helps the agent set expectations about data completeness and structure.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the action and resource, and the second sentence provides usage guidance and data scope. Every sentence earns its place with no filler, making it an exemplary concise description.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter), the presence of an output schema, and safe annotations, the description fully covers the necessary context: what data is returned, when to use the tool, and why it exists. Nothing critical is missing.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage of the single parameter 'shortcode' with a clear description ('Instagram post shortcode from a /p/, /reel/, or /tv/ URL'). The tool description does not add additional parameter semantics, but the schema fully documents the parameter, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('raw Instagram post-page data by shortcode'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_instagram_posts (plural) and get_instagram_post_transcript. It further differentiates by enumerating the unique data fields it returns (coauthors, paid partnership metadata, video versions, etc.), making the purpose unmistakable.

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 an explicit when-to-use scenario: 'when the user needs fresh raw Instagram post metadata that is not guaranteed on regular cached post-list endpoints yet.' This implies an alternative (cached post-list endpoints) and a condition for exclusion, though it does not name a sibling tool explicitly. The guidance is clear and contextually useful.

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