search_hashtag

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavioral constraint (rate limit of 30 unique hashtags per 7 days per account) and permission requirements. While it doesn't explicitly state it's read-only, that is implied from 'search'. The description adds value beyond the schema.

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 concise (3 sentences), front-loads the main action, and includes only essential information. Every sentence adds value: purpose, returns, use cases, permissions, and rate limit.

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 description covers purpose, return fields, permissions, and limitations. Given the existence of an output schema, it adequately complements it. However, it could mention pagination or ordering behavior, which is a minor gap for a search tool.

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 67% (2 of 3 parameters described). The description does not add detail to the 'limit' parameter, leaving its semantics unclear. It does explain return fields, which helps infer usage but not parameter details. Baseline is appropriate given medium coverage.

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 tool's action ('Search public Instagram posts by hashtag') and specifies the resource ('public Instagram posts'). It also lists the return fields (post IDs, captions, media type, permalink), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'list_recent_media' which does not filter by hashtag.

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 context for when to use the tool ('content research, competitor analysis, finding trending topics') and mentions required permissions ('Instagram Public Content Access permission') and rate limits (30 hashtags per 7 days). However, it does not explicitly compare to alternative tools or state when not to use it.

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