Get Scheduled Posts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful semantic detail that posts are scheduled/unpublished, but it does not mention pagination via 'after' or the output format behavior. It does not contradict the annotations.

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 short and direct, with no fluff. The Args block is somewhat redundant with the schema, but it keeps the description tight and readable. Minor structural improvement would be to integrate parameter notes naturally and mention omitted parameters.

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?

With no output schema, the description should explain what the response contains and how to control pagination, but it does not. Two of four parameters ('after' and 'response_format') are effectively undocumented in the description, and no return format or pagination behavior is described. The tool is simple, so this is a moderate gap rather than a fatal one.

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?

The description adds meaning for page_id and repeats limit constraints already present in the schema, but it completely omits the 'after' parameter and the response_format parameter. With schema description coverage at only 25%, the description needed to compensate for these gaps and does not.

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The description states a specific verb ('Lists'), a specific resource ('scheduled (unpublished) posts for a Facebook Page'), and the parenthetical '(unpublished)' clearly separates this from published-post tools like meta_get_published_posts. The scope is unambiguous and immediately actionable.

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 phrase 'scheduled (unpublished)' implies when to use the tool, but there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or which sibling to choose instead. Given the large list of post-related siblings, explicit alternatives or exclusions would improve this.

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