instagram_upload_album

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

The description discloses that this is a write operation ('Publish'), requires a specific environment variable, and details the return values (posted, item_count, media object with fields). While annotations already flag readOnlyHint=false, the description adds valuable context about the prerequisite and expected outcome, going beyond the binary flag.

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 and well-organized: a one-sentence purpose, a requirement line, and labeled Args/Returns sections. It front-loads the action and omits any fluff. Every sentence earns its place, and the structure makes it easy for an agent to parse.

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 moderate-complexity tool with two parameters and an output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, the count constraint, the prerequisite, and the return values. It does not address failure cases or login requirements, but these are less critical given the explicit annotations and schema, making it complete enough for correct invocation.

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 schema already provides complete parameter descriptions (100% coverage), so the description's rephrasing of paths and caption adds little new meaning. It mentions the order for paths, but that is already in the schema. The description does not compensate for any missing schema information because none is missing; hence a baseline of 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 states 'Publish several photos or videos as one carousel post.' This clearly identifies the verb (publish), the resource (photos/videos as a carousel), and distinguishes it from siblings like instagram_upload_photo and instagram_upload_video. It also specifies the count range (2–10), leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 usage scenario (publishing multiple items as a carousel) and includes a specific prerequisite ('Requires INSTAGRAM_ALLOW_WRITES=true'). It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is sufficiently clear to guide selection among upload tools.

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