facebook_get_post_details

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only states it 'Get detailed data', implying a read operation, but fails to disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or error cases (e.g., what happens if the post is private or deleted). The description is too minimal for 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 a single sentence of 13 words that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word adds value without redundancy.

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 large set of sibling tools and lack of output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not specify the output format, whether pagination is involved, or what fields are included beyond examples. An agent would need to guess the response structure, making it incomplete for an informed selection.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with a single parameter 'link' described as 'Facebook post URL'. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameter beyond what the schema already provides, resulting in a baseline score 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'detailed data about a Facebook post', listing example components like reactions, comments, shares, and media. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on individual aspects (e.g., facebook_get_post_comments, facebook_get_post_attachments). However, it could be more explicit about its comprehensive nature versus specialized alternatives.

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?

No guidelines are provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when to use this comprehensive tool instead of specific ones like facebook_get_post_comments, nor does it indicate 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.