get_post_impressions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool fetches data and describes the output format, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or whether it's a read-only operation. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 highly concise and front-loaded, with three clear sentences that efficiently convey purpose, input, and output without any wasted words. Each sentence earns its place by providing essential information in a structured manner.

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 low complexity (single parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose and output format but lacks details on usage context, behavioral traits, and parameter semantics, making it incomplete for optimal agent guidance.

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 description mentions the input parameter 'post_id' and its type, but with 0% schema description coverage, it does not fully compensate by explaining format, validation, or examples. It adds minimal value beyond the schema, which only provides a title and type, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate given the single parameter.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('fetch') and resource ('total impressions of a post'), making it easy to understand what it does. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like 'get_post_impressions_organic' or 'get_post_impressions_paid', which reduces the score from a perfect 5.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple sibling tools related to post impressions (e.g., 'get_post_impressions_organic', 'get_post_impressions_paid'), there is no mention of context, exclusions, or comparisons, leaving the agent to infer usage based on naming alone.

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