meta get pages

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful scope information ('accessible' pages) and notes Instagram account references are included 'when available', but it does not add extensive behavioral context beyond that.

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 front-loaded sentence that states the action and resource first, followed by a compact field list. It contains no filler and does not repeat schema or annotation 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?

The structured metadata is rich: full parameter descriptions, an output schema, and safety annotations. The description covers the core purpose, and remaining details like pagination and businessId behavior live in the schema. Slightly more explicit routing among similar page/account tools would make it fully complete.

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 100%, so limit, cursor, and businessId are fully documented in the input schema. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning, making baseline 3 appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Facebook Pages') and enumerates the returned fields (id, name, category, tasks, picture, linked Instagram account references). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like meta_get_business_assets and meta_get_instagram_accounts.

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 provides clear context: use this when you need accessible Facebook Pages with the listed fields. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the resource-specific wording gives enough guidance for an agent to select it correctly.

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