instagram_account_info

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 known. The description adds valuable context about private fields (email, phone, gender, birthday) being visible only for the signed-in user, and lists the return fields. It does not contradict annotations and adds useful behavioral detail beyond them.

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, effectively front-loaded with the main purpose, then a clarifying note about private fields, and a structured 'Returns' section. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 parameterless, read-only tool, this description is complete. It states the purpose, usage, return fields, and the alternative tool. It implies the requirement of being logged in. Nothing essential is missing.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially 100% covered. There is nothing to describe about parameters. The description implicitly confirms no inputs are needed, and the return structure is outlined. With no parameters, the baseline of 4 applies.

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 the tool gets the profile of the logged-in account and explicitly differentiates from instagram_get_user for other users. The verb 'Get' is specific, the resource is well-defined, and it distinguishes from the most similar 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?

It explicitly says 'Use instagram_get_user for anyone else', giving a direct alternative and the condition for using this tool. This is clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, with no ambiguity.

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