server_info

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, rate limits, or side effects. While it likely has no side effects, this is not stated, leaving the agent uninformed.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence of 8 words that conveys the tool's purpose without any filler. Every word 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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description is minimal but covers the basic purpose. However, it lacks context like typical use cases, what 'configured models' means, or relationship to sibling tools.

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?

With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description adds no parameter information, but baseline for 0 params is 4. The description is adequate as no parameters need explanation.

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 the tool returns information about the MCP server, configured models, and capabilities, using a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes from all sibling tools which focus on Instagram data retrieval.

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?

Implicitly, it is used to learn about server capabilities, but no explicit when-to-use, when-not, or alternatives are provided. The context of sibling tools suggests it is a meta-tool, but guidance is absent.

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