debug_instagram_token

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions using Meta's endpoint and reporting token type, expiry, and scopes, indicating a read-only diagnostic operation. However, it does not disclose potential side effects (e.g., network call, rate limits) or behavior on invalid/missing tokens, leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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 and well-structured: the first sentence states the core action, the second details the output, and the third explains practical use. No fluff, every sentence adds value.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is reasonably complete. It explains what the tool reports and how to interpret the results (expired, about to expire, missing permissions). Minor gap: it doesn't describe the return format or error handling, but this is acceptable for a simple diagnostic utility.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the description cannot add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema. The baseline of 4 is appropriate given no parameters exist and the description focuses on what the tool does with the configured token.

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 function: 'Inspect the configured Instagram access token via Meta's debug_token endpoint.' It also specifies the exact information it reports (type, expiry, scopes), making its purpose distinct from sibling tools that focus on content management, posting, or Cloudinary operations.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use: 'Use this to determine whether the token is expired, about to expire, or lacks the required permissions.' This gives clear context, though it does not name alternative tools for similar diagnostic purposes, which is acceptable given the token inspection is unique among siblings.

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