Manage automatic DM monitoring

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

Annotations mark destructiveHint as true. The description names 'delete' as an action, confirming destructiveness. It also explains behavior differences across actions (e.g., 'stop/pause/resume') beyond what annotations provide. No contradiction with annotations.

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: first states purpose, second gives conditional parameter usage. Every sentence adds value. Very concise, front-loaded, no filler.

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 tool's complexity (9 parameters, 7 actions), the description covers the essential action-parameter mappings. It doesn't explain how to obtain monitor_id (e.g., from status/logs), but overall it is complete for typical use. An output schema exists, so return values are not needed.

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 89%, so most parameters are described in the schema. The description adds value by grouping parameters per action (e.g., 'for action=start, provide post_url, reply_message, and profile_username'), which is not obvious from the schema alone.

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 'Control Instagram AutoDM monitors.' This is a specific verb-resource pair that distinguishes it from sibling tools which are mostly about posting content, analytics, and other social media actions.

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 explicit instructions per action: for 'start', list required parameters; for 'stop/pause/resume/delete/logs', specify monitor_id; for 'status', mention optional parameter. It lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternatives among siblings, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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