Get Page Locations

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond stating it lists location pages. Without additional details on pagination or data freshness, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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 brief and front-loaded with purpose. The Args list is minimal but clear. It could be more efficient by integrating parameter descriptions, but it is not wasteful.

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?

The description lacks information about the output format and does not explain two of the three parameters. Without details on limit and response_format, the agent may misuse the tool. The description is not sufficient given the tool's complexity.

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 description only documents page_id as 'Parent Facebook Page ID', while limit and response_format are not described in the description. Schema coverage is 33%, and the description fails to cover the remaining parameters. This leaves the agent with incomplete understanding.

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 uses the specific verb 'lists' and clearly identifies the resource as 'location pages for a business with multiple locations.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like meta_get_page and other page-related tools.

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 for businesses with multiple locations, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like meta_get_page or other location-related tools. No exclusions or when-not-to-use are mentioned.

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