threads_get_account_insights

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses scope (authenticated user) and return content (views, likes, followers count). However, it does not mention rate limits, permission requirements, or potential errors. It does not explicitly state it is a read-only operation, though 'Fetch' implies it.

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: a single front-loaded sentence for the main purpose, followed by clean 'Args' and 'Returns' sections with no extraneous text. 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 simple one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is mostly complete. It defines the period parameter, lists valid values, and summarizes return fields. Minor gaps include not explaining the metric periods in more depth, but the output schema likely covers return details.

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 input schema provides only a default value for 'period' with no description. The description adds meaning by explaining the parameter's purpose and listing valid values ('day', 'week', 'days_28', 'lifetime'). This goes beyond the schema, though it could further explain the effect of each period.

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 opens with 'Fetch account-level engagement metrics for the authenticated user,' which clearly states the verb (fetch), the resource (account-level engagement metrics), and its scope (authenticated user). The term 'account-level' inherently distinguishes it from sibling post-level tools like threads_get_post_insights.

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?

Usage context is only implied by the purpose and the 'account-level' scope. There is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over sibling tools like threads_get_post_insights or what prerequisites exist. It provides no exclusions or alternatives.

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