list_social_media_placements

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden; 'List' plus the enumerated read-only fields implicitly signals a safe, non-mutating read. It does not mention pagination, result-set size, ordering, or authentication requirements, which are the main unknowns for a listing 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?

Two sentences, zero filler: the resource and its returned fields come first, followed by the optional filter. Every clause earns its place and nothing is buried.

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 zero-required-parameter listing tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (dimensions, aspect ratios, safe-area insets, source URLs), which is exactly the information the output schema would otherwise supply. The only gap is sibling differentiation against get_social_media_placement.

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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter has an explicit enum, so the schema already documents platform filtering fully. The description's 'Optionally filter by platform' confirms optionality but adds no meaning beyond the schema's own description, which is the correct baseline of 3.

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') and resource ('social media video and image placements') and enumerates the returned attributes, so the agent knows exactly what comes back. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the singular sibling get_social_media_placement, leaving that distinction to be inferred from the names.

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?

'Optionally filter by platform' establishes that the filter is discretionary and the unfiltered call is valid, which is genuine usage guidance. However, there is no statement about when to prefer this over get_social_media_placement (single placement retrieval) or any indication of scope limits.

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