Get one post

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds real value absent an output schema by enumerating the returned fields, including the non-obvious 'carousel slides' payload. It says nothing about auth or rate limits, which is the only remaining gap.

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 sentences, zero filler, and the identity/scope statement plus the return-field list are front-loaded before the ID-provenance note. Every clause carries information an agent can act on.

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 two-parameter, read-only lookup with complete annotations, the description covers what it returns, how to obtain the ID, and the output-format choice is fully documented in the schema. Nothing an agent needs in order to call this correctly 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 100% (media_id with a format example, response_format with an enum), so baseline is 3. The description exceeds baseline by documenting value provenance — where valid media IDs are obtained (ig_list_media) — which the schema does not state and which materially reduces bad-ID calls.

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 ('Get') and resource scope ('one post, reel or carousel by ID') and enumerates exactly what comes back: caption, type, media URL, permalink, likes, comment count and carousel slides. The singular 'one ... by ID' cleanly separates it from the sibling list tool ig_list_media.

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 tells the agent where the required ID comes from ('IDs come from ig_list_media'), which is the main usage prerequisite. It does not spell out exclusions or point at the closest alternative for aggregate stats (ig_get_media_insights), so it stops short of a full when/when-not statement.

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