Tendencias de hashtag

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It implies a read-only operation (search and summarize) and discloses the scope of 'publicaciones propias'. However, it lacks details on possible limitations, required permissions, or what 'resume interacción acumulada' entails in terms of output shape.

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 a single sentence and efficiently captures the core function. However, the parenthetical '(contentSearch en timelinenew)' introduces an internal implementation detail that is not necessary for a user and slightly detracts from conciseness.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no nested objects), the description provides a basis for understanding the tool. But since there is no output schema, the description does not clearly specify what the summarized interaction looks like (e.g., a single metric, a breakdown, or a list). This gap makes it less complete for an AI agent.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'hashtag' well-defined (target hashtag without #). The tool description adds context about how the hashtag is used (to search posts and summarize interaction) but does not provide additional syntactic or format details beyond the schema.

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 a specific action: searching own posts containing a hashtag and summarizing accumulated interaction. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on hashtag-based aggregation, which no other sibling mentions.

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 implies usage: it is for analyzing own posts by hashtag. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like analizar_rendimiento_posts or obtener_metricas_perfil, nor does it provide any exclusions or conditions.

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