Get Page Tabs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds a minor nuance by specifying 'custom tabs' (excluding default tabs), but does not disclose pagination, rate limits, or error scenarios. Given the strong annotation coverage, a 3 is appropriate.

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 a single, focused sentence followed by a concise Args list. It is front-loaded with the purpose and includes only necessary parameter documentation, with no extraneous content. Every element earns its place.

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 list operation with annotations covering safety, the description is largely complete. It specifies the action and the required parameter. However, it omits details about the return format (e.g., list of tab objects) and any authorization requirements, which could be relevant for an agent. Since no output schema is provided, a bit more context would be beneficial, but the core need is satisfied.

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 50%: response_format has a description in the schema, while page_id does not. The description compensates by explicitly stating 'page_id (string): Facebook Page ID,' adding meaning for that parameter. The other parameter is already documented, so overall the description fills the gap.

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 it 'Lists custom tabs on a Facebook Page,' with a specific verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools, none of which deal with page tabs, so there is no ambiguity about its purpose.

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, nor any prerequisites such as page admin permissions or access token requirements. The only usage hint is implicit in the action of listing tabs, which is insufficient for an agent choosing between many similar getter tools.

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