get_v1_fbsearch_places

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

Annotations already disclose readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context beyond them: it is a live external request to Instagram that is billed per call, which an agent should weigh before invoking. It stops short of covering rate limits or failure/empty-result behaviour.

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?

Two tight sentences plus an endpoint reference, with the core action and required parameter front-loaded and no filler. Every clause adds routing, parameter, or cost 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 still tells the agent what the result is for (finding a location id), which is the key missing piece. It omits response shape and result limits, but for a simple three-parameter search that is a minor gap.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden and does name all three parameters meaningfully: `query` as the place name, and `lat`/`lng` as optional geo context. It does not explain the surprising preset coordinate defaults or accepted formats, so it compensates well but not completely.

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 and resource ('Search Instagram places by name') and immediately names the scope of the optional geo parameters. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like get_v1_location_search and get_v1_search_hashtags without opening any 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?

Explicitly routes the agent: use this to obtain a location id for get_g2_location_by_id and the location media tools, and switch to get_v1_location_search when only coordinates are available. This is textbook when/when-not/alternative guidance.

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