get_ig_account_insights

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool returns daily account-level stats and the expected date format, and it implies a read-only operation. However, it omits auth prerequisites, rate limits, timezone behavior, and what happens if metrics is omitted.

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 sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded and the date-format note is directly actionable.

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?

Even though an output schema exists and return values do not need to be described, the input side is under-specified: 0% schema coverage, no annotations, and no parameter explanations leave an agent guessing about required identifiers and metric options for a correct call.

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 helps with since/until by giving the AAAA-MM-JJ format and hints at metrics via examples, but it does not explain ig_user_id, valid metric values, the default behavior of metrics=null, or how the date range is interpreted.

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 identifies the resource ('compte Instagram'), the granularity ('quotidiennes'), and sample metrics (reach, profile views), which distinguishes it from story/media/audience sibling tools. It lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieves', but the tool name supplies the action.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_ig_story_insights, get_ig_media_insights, or get_page_insights. The only usage hint is the date format, which is not a selection criterion.

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