meta_page_insights

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only lists metric categories and does not disclose behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, or error handling (e.g., invalid pageId). No contradiction with annotations (none provided).

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 concise at one sentence, but it is under-specified. It could include essential details without becoming overly long. The structure is flat and lacks front-loading of key information.

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?

Given the complexity (5 parameters, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It omits critical details such as how to construct metric strings, the meaning of periods, date formats, and what the tool returns. The agent cannot infer correct usage.

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 80%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no information beyond the schema; it does not explain metric formatting, enumerations, or the purpose of parameters. The provided examples ('impressions, engagement, fans') are insufficient.

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 'Facebook Page insights (impressions, engagement, fans, etc.)' identifies the resource and metric categories but lacks a verb (e.g., 'Retrieve'), making it a noun phrase. It does not distinguish from sibling tools like meta_ad_insights or meta_graph, which also deal with insights.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as meta_graph or meta_ad_insights. The description does not mention any context or prerequisites.

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