Get User Highlights

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, establishing a safe read operation. The description adds useful context about return structure (dict with url and highlights list, each with title, cover_url, highlight_id) and mentions the ctx parameter for progress reporting, which is not in the schema.

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 concise and well-structured: a one-line purpose, clear Args section, and Returns section. Every sentence earns its place with no 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 single-parameter tool with an output schema implied, the description is largely complete. It covers input, return format, and context. It does not mention potential errors or rate limits, but given the tool's simplicity and annotations, this is a minor gap.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the 'username' parameter with examples (e.g., 'instagram', 'natgeo') and introducing the 'ctx' parameter. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema type of string.

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 'Get an Instagram user's story highlights' – a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_user_stories by specifying 'highlights' rather than stories or posts.

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 implies usage (fetching story highlights for a given username) but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this over similar tools like get_user_stories or get_user_posts. No exclusions or alternatives are named.

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