instagram_upload_photo

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description adds significant behavioral context: posts publicly and immediately, requires INSTAGRAM_ALLOW_WRITES=true, handles format conversion (JPEG accepted, others converted), and warns to confirm with the person. These details are not present in annotations and guide appropriate use.

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 efficient and well-structured: the core action is front-loaded, followed by key behavioral caveats, then parameter and return summaries. Every sentence serves a purpose without redundancy, making it easy for an agent to scan quickly.

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 tool that publishes a photo, the description covers all essential aspects: prerequisites (permission env var), behavioral outcomes (public, immediate), format handling, and return structure. The existence of an output schema covers return details, and the description aligns with it, leaving no obvious gaps 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description restates the two parameters (path and caption) but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's detailed field descriptions (e.g., absolute path format, caption max length). No extra semantic value is provided.

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 action, 'Publish a photo to the feed,' with a clear verb and target resource. It intuitively differentiates from sibling tools like upload_video, upload_reel, and upload_story by naming 'photo' and 'feed.'

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 implies usage context by specifying the feed and photo type, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., upload_story or upload_reel). No exclusions or named alternatives are provided, leaving usage guidance implicit rather than explicit.

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