Search Facebook Places

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by detailing what is returned (Place IDs, names, addresses, coordinates) and constraints (distance max, limit range, requirement of q or center). This goes 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 well-organized with clear sections and bullet-like parameter listings. It is concise without omitting critical details. A minor point: the response_format parameter is only in the schema, not mentioned in the description, but overall structure is good.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description lists what is returned. There are 6 parameters, but only 5 are described in the text (missing response_format). The description is adequate for a search tool, but the omission of response_format—a useful output formatting option—is a minor gap.

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 high (83%), but the description enriches parameter meanings with examples ('Central Park', '40.7829,-73.9654'), default/max values (distance=1000, max=50000), and category examples ('FOOD_BEVERAGE'). This adds significant value beyond the schema.

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 'Searches for Facebook Places (locations) by name or coordinates.' and specifies the use case (getting location_id for tagging). This distinguishes it from sibling search tools like meta_search_ad_library or meta_search_instagram_hashtag.

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 explicitly states when to use it (for location_id) and includes a note about providing at least q or center. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the sibling context makes it clear. No alternative tools are named.

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