ig_account_insights

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

Annotations already carry the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), so the description only needs to add context — and it does: the default 28-day window and the fact that `breakdown` switches the response to follower demographics. It says nothing about rate limits or metric availability, hence not a 5.

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, zero filler; the core behavior (range + default) is front-loaded before the optional breakdown mode. Every clause carries information.

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 read-only analytics tool with no output schema, the description covers the scope, default range, and the one parameter that changes the response shape. It is slightly thin on which metrics are available and what the default (no-breakdown) response contains, but nothing critical is missing.

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 coverage is 60%, so the description must compensate, and it does for the most ambiguous parameter: `breakdown` is explained as returning follower demographics for the listed enum values, and the 28-day default contextualizes since/until. `account` and `metrics` are left without added meaning 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?

States a specific verb+resource: account-level metrics over a time range, with a 28-day default, plus the demographic breakdown mode. This clearly separates it from ig_media_insights, though it never names that sibling explicitly, so the differentiation is inferable rather than stated.

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 is implied by the scope (account metrics, default last 28 days) and the breakdown option, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance relative to ig_analytics or ig_media_insights, which likely overlap. The agent must infer the boundary between account and media insights.

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