get_post_insights

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states it 'fetches' data, implying a read operation, but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or response behavior. The mention of 'Output: dict with multiple metrics' adds minimal context, insufficient for a mutation-free tool with no 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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by input and output details in a structured format. It uses three concise sentences with no wasted words, though the output detail could be slightly more integrated into the main sentence.

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 read tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers basics like purpose and parameter semantics. However, it lacks behavioral context (e.g., error handling, data freshness) and doesn't fully address sibling tool differentiation, making it adequate but with gaps.

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 explicitly mentions 'Input: post_id (str)', adding meaning beyond the schema, which has 0% description coverage and only lists the parameter name. This clarifies the parameter's role and type, compensating well for the low schema coverage with a 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 verb 'fetch' and resource 'insights metrics' with examples (impressions, reactions, clicks, etc.), making the purpose specific. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_post_impressions or get_post_clicks, which target specific metrics rather than all insights.

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 many sibling tools fetching specific metrics (e.g., get_post_impressions, get_post_clicks), it fails to indicate that this tool aggregates multiple metrics, leaving usage context implied rather than explicit.

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