account_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses what the tool covers (reach, engagement, followers; Facebook + Instagram; N-day period) and implies a read-only summary operation. However, it does not mention required permissions, exact time-window semantics, or aggregation behavior, leaving some ambiguity.

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 short, dense sentences with no filler. The core behavior is front-loaded, and the usage guidance is separated cleanly. 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?

For a two-parameter summary tool with an output schema available, this is largely complete. It states the metric categories, time scope, and recommended usage. The main gap is not explaining what page_id must refer to, but the tool name and cross-platform description make that reasonably inferable.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that the days parameter is an N-day window via 'sur N jours', but page_id is left implicit. Both parameter names are reasonably self-explanatory, so this is adequate though not rich.

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 states a specific deliverable: a synthesis of Facebook and Instagram over N days with scope, engagement, and follower metrics. It also positions itself as a recommended entry point for a quick overview, which helps distinguish it from the more granular sibling insights tools. A verb like 'returns' would be stronger, but noun 'Synthèse' is unambiguous.

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?

'Point d'entré recommandé pour un bilan rapide' clearly communicates when to use this tool: as the first stop for a high-level cross-platform summary. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, but the context is sufficient for an agent to route appropriately.

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