Get Page Insights

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint), so the bar is lower. The description adds the default-metrics behaviour, but says nothing about how omitted page resolution works, rate limits, or what a lifetime/total_over_range query returns differently.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler: verb, resource, default, and the two scoping dimensions appear immediately.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. However, for a 5-parameter analytics tool with 40% schema coverage and several opaque enum values, the description leaves real gaps: period semantics, metric name vocabulary, and the page/post sibling choice.

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 only 40% across 5 parameters, so the description must compensate more than it does. It mentions the period/date-range dimensions and the default metrics, but does not explain the period enum values (days_28, lifetime, total_over_range) or the since/until defaulting behaviour.

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 and resource (Page-level analytics) plus the default metric family (post engagements), which separates it from the sibling get_post_insights at least by scope adjective. It never names the sibling explicitly, so an agent must infer the page-vs-post distinction from the word 'Page-level'.

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 intended use (fetch page analytics over a period and date range) is implied, and the 'default: post engagements' note tells the caller the no-arg behaviour. There is no explicit guidance on when to use get_page_insights vs get_post_insights, nor any prerequisites or exclusions.

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