List Facebook pages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile, so the bar is lowered. The description adds the scoping fact that pages are 'connected to a profile' but discloses nothing further — behavior when the optional profile parameter is omitted, pagination, or failure conditions. It does not contradict the annotations, but contributes little beyond them.

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?

Six words, efficient and front-loaded, but the brevity veers toward under-specification. The single noun phrase carries only the resource and a vague scope; it earns its place but does little informational work beyond the name and title.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional parameter, no enums) and an output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The critical gap is the profile parameter: 0% schema coverage and no description of how to supply it, though its optionality means the tool can still be invoked with no arguments. Adequate for tool selection, thin for correct invocation with the parameter.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented profile parameter. The phrase 'connected to a profile' merely echoes the parameter name and gives no indication of accepted values, format, or how to identify a profile. It adds marginal meaning but leaves the only parameter effectively undocumented.

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 names a concrete resource (Facebook pages) and a scope ('connected to a profile'), and the resource name clearly distinguishes it from platform siblings like get_linkedin_pages and get_pinterest_boards. However, the description itself is a noun phrase with no explicit verb — 'List' appears only in the title — and 'Facebook pages connected to a profile' borderlines on restating the name.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. With a large sibling set containing many similar list tools (get_linkedin_pages, get_pinterest_boards, get_google_business_locations), the description provides no conditions, exclusions, or alternative routing. The agent is left to infer usage solely from the resource name.

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