meta_ads_page_posts_list

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

The description explicitly states 'Read-only,' indicating no destructive side effects. It also explains that account_id is optional and falls back to an environment variable. It lists the return fields, including an insights summary. However, it does not discuss rate limits, pagination behavior beyond the limit parameter, or authentication details beyond admin access requirement for page_id. With no annotations, the description provides good but not exhaustive transparency.

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 three sentences with clear front-loading. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second lists output fields, and the third provides usage context and ties to a downstream tool. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (list posts, no output schema), the description covers purpose, output fields, read-only nature, parameter semantics, and a common workflow (boosting). It also mentions the account_id fallback. It is contextually complete for an AI agent to select and use this tool correctly.

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%, and the description adds meaningful context: for page_id, it specifies the requirement of admin access; for account_id, it mentions fallback to environment variable; for limit, it reiterates default and max. The description does not introduce new parameter meanings but reinforces and clarifies schema 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 lists published posts on a Facebook Page and specifies the exact fields returned (id, message, created_time, type, permalink_url, insights summary). It distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning the use case of boosting organic posts via meta_ads_page_posts_boost, which is a unique action not covered by other 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?

The description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: to find organic posts to boost, and gives a rationale (boosting an organic high-performer is often cheaper). It implies that this is for reading published posts, not for other operations. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives for other post operations (e.g., creating or deleting posts), though the sibling tool meta_ads_page_posts_boost is mentioned for boosting.

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