get_post_analytics

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses important behaviors: supports pagination and the correct placement of the page parameter. This is valuable for correct invocation. No side effects or auth requirements are mentioned, but as a read operation, the disclosed behaviors are sufficient.

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, minimal waste. The first sentence states purpose concisely; the second covers crucial pagination and parameter placement. Every part earns its place.

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 is provided, so the description should compensate. It mentions pagination but does not describe the response structure (e.g., what fields are returned in each page). For a tool with 6 parameters and moderate complexity, the description is adequate but leaves room for ambiguity about the response format.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by listing valid metric options and explicitly stating which metrics are invalid (e.g., 'lifetime.comments'), preventing errors. It also notes that fields default to all if omitted. This enriches the schema's descriptions.

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 it retrieves post-level analytics (impressions, engagements) for a date range, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_profile_analytics or get_listening_topic_metrics, which are related but cover different scopes.

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 explicit guidance on pagination: instructing to check paging.total_pages and pull all pages. It also warns that the page parameter must be in the request body, not URL. This helps avoid common errors. However, it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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