get_gql_user_about

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-structured context: this is a live request to Instagram billed per call, which matters for cost-conscious agents. It stops short of describing error or rate-limit behavior, so it is not a full 5.

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?

One dense sentence front-loads the resource and returns, followed by a routing clause and a terse cost/endpoint parenthetical. No filler sentences; every clause carries 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?

With no output schema, the description helpfully enumerates the returned fields, which is the key missing piece for this tool. It also discloses the cost model and underlying endpoint. Only minor gaps remain (no pagination/error semantics, no id format), which are low-impact for a single-id read.

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 coverage is 0% and the single 'id' parameter is undocumented in the schema, so the description carries the burden. It partially compensates by naming the domain ('an Instagram user id'), but gives no format guidance (numeric vs. opaque GraphQL id) beyond that. Minimum-viable for a one-param tool.

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?

States a specific verb (Get) and resource (the 'About this account' panel for an Instagram user id), then enumerates the exact fields returned (verified status, registration country, creation date, former usernames). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the lookalike sibling get_v2_user_by_id, so an agent can route correctly without opening either schema.

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?

Gives both the positive condition ('Use it for account provenance checks') and the alternative with its selecting condition ('use get_v2_user_by_id for the regular profile'). This is explicit when-to-use and when-to-use-something-else guidance.

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