Get bulk post analytics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses a useful behavioral trait: per-post errors are included, which tells the agent that partial failures are possible. However, it does not disclose whether this is a read-only operation, whether it requires any special permissions, or what the response shape looks like.

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 a single short sentence that front-loads the key constraint (up to 60 posts) and the notable behavior (per-post errors included). It is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter tool, though it could have used the space to add more behavioral context.

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 one-parameter read-style analytics tool, the description is mostly adequate: it states the resource, the batch limit, and the error behavior. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it leaves the agent without information about the response format, whether the operation is read-only, or how per-post errors are represented. The sibling get_post_analytics exists, so a brief contrast would have improved completeness.

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 does not explain the postIds parameter beyond what the schema already shows (array of strings, 1-60 items). The 'up to 60 posts' phrasing mirrors the schema's maxItems constraint, adding no new semantic meaning. The description adds no detail about what the post IDs refer to or how they are used.

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 verb ('get') and resource ('bulk post analytics') and adds a concrete scope ('up to 60 posts'). It is clear enough to distinguish from the sibling get_post_analytics, though it does not explicitly name that sibling or contrast itself with it.

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?

The description implies usage context: it is for retrieving analytics for multiple posts at once, with per-post errors included. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over get_post_analytics or get_account_analytics, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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