Retrieve recent posts from a Facebook Page feed with post ID, message, creation time, and story details. Use the limit parameter to specify between 1 and 100 posts.
Retrieve recent posts from the Facebook Page feed. Returns post ID, message, creation time, and story.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Number of posts to return (1–100, default 10) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not state that this is a read-only operation, whether it requires Page auth/permissions, how pagination works, or how 'recent' and ordering are determined. Returning field names is the only behavioral detail offered.
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 tight sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, with the return payload listed second. 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 simple single-param read tool, the description covers purpose and enumerates the returned fields, partially compensating for the absent output schema. Only pagination/ordering behavior is left unstated.
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 single parameter 'limit' has 100% schema description coverage (1–100, default 10), so the schema already documents it fully. The description adds nothing about the parameter, making the baseline 3 appropriate.
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?
Names a specific verb + resource ('Retrieve recent posts from the Facebook Page feed') and enumerates the returned fields. It is clear, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like facebook_get_comments or facebook_get_insights, which are also read/retrieval tools.
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?
There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or reference to alternatives. The agent must infer that this is the read-only feed-listing tool purely from the name and purpose sentence.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.