get_page_insights

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does add daily granularity, date format, and default-metric behavior. But it leaves the default metric set undefined and does not mention token/authorization needs, rate limits, or the period parameter's broader behavior.

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 compact sentences front-load the purpose and then add only the two operational notes an agent needs: date format and default metric behavior. No filler or 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?

For a 5-parameter tool with no schema descriptions and no annotations, the description is too thin: it omits period value semantics, the actual default metric set, and authentication or page-id context. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but it does not fill these invocation gaps.

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% and the schema provides only types and titles. The description usefully documents the date format for since/until and the fallback behavior of metrics, but period, page_id, and valid metric strings are left unexplained, so the description only partly compensates for the bare schema.

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 identifies the tool's return subject: daily statistics for a Page (reach, engagement, followers). It is clear enough to distinguish page-level analytics from sibling tools like get_post_insights or get_ig_*_insights, though it does not explicitly name any alternative.

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?

It gives call-level guidance: since/until must be YYYY-MM-DD and metrics can be omitted to use a default set. However, it never states when to prefer this tool over sibling insight tools or lists exclusions for when it should not be used, so tool-selection guidance is only implied by the Page scope.

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