get_account_insights

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only lists returned metrics and implies a read operation but doesn't explicitly state read-only, destructive potential, or any prerequisites. The minimal disclosure leaves gaps.

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?

Single sentence front-loading the action ('Get performance insights') and resource. No unnecessary words, efficiently communicates the core functionality.

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?

Despite good schema coverage, the description omits critical context: no overview of breakdowns, date presets, filtering, or level parameter. No output schema exists, so description should provide a high-level picture. The minimal description leaves the agent underinformed.

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% with descriptions for all 7 parameters. The tool description adds no extra semantics beyond mentioning example metrics. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already covers parameter meaning.

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 it gets performance insights for the ad account, listing example metrics. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling insight tools (e.g., get_ad_insights, get_campaign_insights) which target different levels, leaving ambiguity about the scope.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_campaign_insights or get_adset_insights. The agent must infer from the tool name, but sibling tools exist for other levels without explicit mention.

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