ig_analytics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds the scope of analysis (aggregate engagement/views stats over posts), but says nothing about defaults, lookback windows, rate limits, or auth requirements.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that lists the metrics efficiently with no filler. It is underspecified rather than bloated, but the structure itself is tight.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not describe the shape of the returned analytics (groupings, time granularity, units). Combined with two undocumented parameters, an agent lacks enough to call it confidently or anticipate the result.

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 description coverage is only 33% (only the 'account' param is documented). The description mentions no parameters at all, so it does not compensate for the undocumented 'posts' and 'time_zone' fields or clarify their effect on the analysis.

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 names the resource ('Análisis de rendimiento') and enumerates the concrete outputs (top/worst posts, best days/hours, engagement and views averages), so an agent can tell what it produces. It stops short of differentiating itself from analytics siblings such as ig_media_insights and ig_account_insights, which also report performance metrics.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus the many analytics/insights siblings (ig_media_insights, ig_account_insights). The agent must infer the distinction from the metric list alone.

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