Get Facebook Page Posts

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds value by stating the required prior call to meta_list_pages and specifying the returned post fields (message, permalink, created time, post ID). No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 well-structured: a one-line purpose, a required prerequisite, a brief Args section, and a Returns section. Every part earns its place, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description clearly states what the return value contains. It also covers the prerequisite call and pagination cursor. For a simple read-only list tool with four parameters, this is complete enough for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 75%, so the schema already documents page_id, after, and response_format, while limit has constraints. The description's Args block largely restates schema information rather than adding deeper semantics. It does not describe response_format, which the schema already covers. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Lists posts from a Facebook Page feed.' It clearly states what the tool does and aligns with the title. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this from sibling tools like meta_get_published_posts or meta_get_visitor_posts, which also return page-related post listings.

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 a clear prerequisite: 'meta_list_pages called first to load page tokens,' which tells the agent when this tool can be used. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion cases, so it falls short of a 5, but the context is concrete and actionable.

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