Seguidores agora

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses a key behavior: includes organic and paid growth because it uses the real account number. However, it does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only, mention rate limits, or describe data freshness.

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 concise sentences, front-loaded with the snapshot purpose, and every clause adds value. It is free of redundant information and fits the tool's simple scope.

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 description explains the core return value (followers per asset and consolidated) and the organic+paid growth nuance, which is sufficient given the low complexity and optional single parameter. However, the absence of an output schema or annotations means some details like exact output structure are not covered.

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% because the 'assets' parameter already includes a descriptive definition (IDs or account names, empty = whole portfolio). The description adds no further parameter-specific semantics, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 provides a current snapshot ('Foto do momento') of total followers per asset and consolidated portfolio (Facebook + Instagram). It implicitly distinguishes from followers_timeseries by emphasizing the present moment, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 use for obtaining immediate follower counts, but does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over followers_timeseries or page_insights. There are no exclusions or alternative recommendations provided.

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