Get Page Fan Demographics

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond 'via insights' and does not disclose potential caveats such as access token requirements, metric availability, or response limitations.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a clean, readable Args list. Every sentence adds value without fluff or repetition.

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 simple read-only tool with annotations covering safety, the description is mostly complete. It lacks explicit mention of response_format in the Args list and does not elaborate on what each demographic metric returns, but the schema and enums cover the key details.

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 low at 33%, and the description compensates by explaining page_id as 'Facebook Page ID' and metric as a 'Demographic metric' with the allowed enum values. The response_format parameter is not mentioned in the description, but the schema already provides its meaning and default.

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 ('Gets') and resource ('fan/follower demographic breakdowns for a Facebook Page'), and clarifies the data source ('via insights'). It is clear and distinct from the general meta_get_page_insights sibling, though it does not explicitly name that sibling.

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: use this tool when you need fan/follower demographic breakdowns for a Facebook Page. However, it does not explicitly contrast it with similar insight tools like meta_get_page_insights or state when not to use it.

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