list_ig_accountsRetrieve connected Instagram accounts with IDs, handles, and follower counts. Use an account ID as igAccountId to create automations or send broadcasts.
List the connected Instagram accounts (id, handle, followers). Use an id as igAccountId when creating automations or broadcasts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
readOnlyHint=true already declares this as a safe read operation, so the description's disclosure of returned fields (id, handle, followers) is the main added value. It says nothing about authentication, pagination, or what happens for accounts with no connection, so it is adequate but not rich beyond the annotation.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, then the returned fields, then the practical follow-up. No filler or redundancy.
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?
With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so by listing the three exposed fields. For a zero-parameter list tool this is fully sufficient for correct invocation.
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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description still usefully names the identifier field ('id') that flows into `igAccountId` elsewhere, which is meaningful context even though no input schema exists to document.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('List the connected Instagram accounts') and even enumerates the returned fields (id, handle, followers). It is trivially distinguishable from siblings like list_tags, list_leads, and list_automations, which cover different resources.
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 second sentence gives a downstream usage hint ('Use an id as `igAccountId` when creating automations or broadcasts'), which implies why an agent would call this. However, it never states when to prefer this tool over alternatives or any precondition (e.g. account must be connected), so guidance is only implied.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.