Get Page Photos

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, which align with the description 'Lists'. The description adds context about the type parameter and default limit but does not disclose pagination behavior (cursor-based via 'after' parameter) or any other traits beyond what annotations provide.

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 concise: two sentences followed by a bullet list of arguments. It front-loads the main action. The bullet list could be more structured (e.g., markdown formatting), but it is clear and free of 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?

Given 5 parameters, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It fails to mention pagination ('after'), response format options, or what the returned data contains (e.g., photo IDs, URLs). Without output schema, these details are necessary for proper use.

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 only 20% (only response_format described). The description adds meaning for page_id, type, and limit with brief explanations, covering 3 of 5 parameters. However, it omits 'after' (pagination cursor) and 'response_format', leaving gaps despite partially compensating for low schema coverage.

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 clearly states the purpose: 'Lists photos uploaded to a Facebook Page.' It specifies the type parameter to distinguish between 'uploaded' and 'tagged', which is a key differentiator. However, it does not explicitly compare to siblings like meta_get_page_tagged, which overlaps with the 'tagged' option.

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 explains the type parameter as 'uploaded (by page) or tagged (photos page is tagged in)', giving context on when to use each. However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, such as for only tagged photos without other page data, nor does it compare to similar tools like meta_get_page_tagged.

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