get_facebook_profile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Get') but doesn't describe traits like whether authentication is required, rate limits, error handling, or what the output format might be (e.g., JSON with specific fields). For a tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence 'Get Facebook profile/page data'. It is front-loaded and wastes no words, making it easy to parse. Every word earns its place by specifying the action and target, though it could benefit from more detail.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (a data retrieval tool for a social media platform), lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what data is returned, any limitations (e.g., public data only), or behavioral aspects. This leaves the agent with insufficient context to use the tool effectively.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'url' documented as 'Facebook profile or page URL'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as URL format examples or validation rules. According to the rules, with high schema coverage, the baseline is 3 even without param info in the description.

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 'Get Facebook profile/page data' states a verb ('Get') and resource ('Facebook profile/page data'), making the purpose understandable. However, it's vague about what specific data is retrieved (e.g., basic info, posts, followers) and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_instagram_profile' beyond the platform name. This is minimal but not specific enough for a higher score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention any prerequisites, context for use (e.g., for social media analysis), or exclusions (e.g., not for private profiles). With multiple sibling tools for different platforms, this lack of differentiation leaves the agent without clear usage instructions.

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