get_v1_location_medias_top_chunk

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 new behavior: one page per call, cursor-style pagination using max_id from the prior response, and that this is a live Instagram request billed per call. It stops short of covering failure modes or rate limits, so not a 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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the verb/resource, then pagination mechanics, then the sibling disambiguation, then the cost caveat. Every sentence adds information an agent needs; nothing is restated from the schema or annotations.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description conveys the essential return contract indirectly (one page per call, next cursor via max_id) plus cost and the underlying endpoint. It does not describe the post fields returned, which is a minor gap for a list endpoint but not a blocking one.

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 must carry the parameter burden and largely does: it tells the agent to pass location_pk and explains max_id as a continuation cursor taken from the previous response. It does not clarify accepted location_pk formats or that it is an integer PK, which leaves a small gap.

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 ('List top posts made at an Instagram location') and scopes the result as 'top' rather than 'recent'. It explicitly names the sibling get_v1_location_medias_recent_chunk as the tool for newest posts, so an agent can distinguish the two 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 the selection condition directly: use this for top posts, use get_v1_location_medias_recent_chunk for the newest posts. It also pre-empts the pagination workflow ('one page per call', 'paginate with max_id from the previous response'), leaving nothing to inference.

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