get_v2_user_stories

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-structured context: force=true skips the account privacy check, this is a live request to Instagram, and it is billed as 2 requests per call. It doesn't describe pagination or rate-limit ceilings, which keeps it short of 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?

One tight paragraph, front-loaded with the core purpose, then routing, then cost/privacy caveats, then the endpoint. Every clause carries information; no filler.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description carries return-value burden, which it only partially addresses (it says 'active stories' but not the shape of the response). It does cover the billing, privacy override, and transport caveats an agent needs before calling a metered live endpoint.

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 67%, so the schema documents force and safe_int, and the description's force explanation largely restates the schema's 'Skip account privacy check' with added behavioral framing. safe_int and user_id receive no description-level treatment, so this is adequate but not compensating for the coverage 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+resource ('Get an Instagram user's active stories by user id') and immediately distinguishes itself from the two nearest siblings by naming the id-vs-handle-vs-highlights split. An agent can select it without opening the 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?

Explicit routing guidance: use this when you have the id, use get_v2_user_stories_by_username when you only have a handle, use get_v2_user_highlights for saved highlights. Conditions for each alternative are stated, not implied.

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