List Posts

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

Even though annotations already carry readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, the description adds substantial behavioral nuance: edges are ranked and capped near ~600 posts per year, Reels are excluded, returned IDs are composite strings, and feed/tagged edges wrap content in an untrusted envelope with injection warnings. This far exceeds annotation coverage.

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 dense but every sentence contributes: purpose, edge selection, two hard limitations, ID format, and a security warning. Information is front-loaded and nothing is filler.

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 there is no output schema, the description responsibly covers return-shape nuances (composite id, untrusted-content envelope) and known pitfalls. An agent has enough context to select the right edge, handle pagination, avoid the Reels trap, and interpret results safely.

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 schema already has rich descriptions for all 5 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds extra semantic value for `edge` by revealing ranking behavior and historical depth limits, and for pagination by warning that exhausting pages is not equivalent to completeness.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('List a Page's posts') and immediately clarifies the pagination model ('one cursor page at a time'). It also differentiates the four edge variants and explicitly contrasts this tool with facebook_list_reels, so an agent can tell exactly what it does.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance: it explains which edge to choose for different intents and names facebook_list_reels as the alternative for Reels. It also flags a crucial limit — running out of pages does not mean complete history — which shapes when a caller should trust the result.

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