get_page_posts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose that only organic posts are returned and enumerates the post fields and metrics. However, it does not mention authentication requirements (despite an access_token parameter), rate limits, or pagination, leaving some behavioral ambiguity for a read operation.

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, front-loaded with the main purpose, and well-structured using Args/Returns blocks. Every sentence contributes meaningful information without repetition or 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?

For a list-style tool with a modest parameter set and an output schema present, the description covers the essentials: purpose, key arguments, and return value structure. The main gap is access_token semantics and lack of pagination details, but overall it is sufficient for most use cases.

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. It explains page_id and limit clearly ('ID de la Página', 'Máximo de publicaciones a devolver (default 25)'), adding meaning beyond the bare schema. However, it omits the access_token parameter entirely, leaving one parameter undocumented in both schema and description.

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 begins with a specific verb and resource: 'Lista las publicaciones ORGÁNICAS de la Página' (lists the page's organic posts), and further details the included metrics and insights. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_insights, which likely aggregates page-level insights, and create_page_post, which creates posts.

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 clearly implies the tool is for retrieving a page's organic posts with interaction and insight metrics. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives (e.g., get_insights for aggregated insights) or mention exclusions like paid posts or pagination behavior.

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