List Meta pages & ad accounts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that it returns a connect hint if the user hasn't connected Meta, which is useful behavioral context. It doesn't contradict annotations and provides additional info beyond what structured fields convey, though it doesn't detail other behaviors like pagination.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core action and scope, then adding usage context and a prerequisite. Every clause serves a purpose, with no redundancy or filler.

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 listing tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it returns (a list of pages/ad accounts), when to use it, and a prerequisite. Could mention return format or connection-failure behavior in more detail, but these are minor for this scope.

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 has zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% with an empty object. The description adds nothing about parameters because there are none to explain. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description appropriately avoids extraneous detail.

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 clearly states the specific action ('List') and resource ('Facebook Pages with any linked Instagram business account and ad accounts') on the connected Meta account. It also provides context for its use, distinguishing it from posting tools by naming post_to_meta and create_meta_campaign. This is unambiguous and differentiates the tool from siblings.

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?

Explicitly instructs to use before post_to_meta/create_meta_campaign to pick the target, providing clear when-to-use context. It also notes the prerequisite of having Meta connected. However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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