get_account_pages

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that the access token is optional and will use a cached token if not provided, which adds some context. However, it lacks details on authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what the JSON response structure entails, leaving significant gaps for a tool that interacts with an external API.

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 well-structured and concise, with a clear purpose statement followed by Args and Returns sections. Each sentence adds value without redundancy, making it easy to parse and understand 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?

Given that there is an output schema (which handles return values), the description does not need to detail the JSON response. However, for a tool with no annotations and external API interaction, it lacks sufficient context on authentication, error cases, or behavioral constraints, making it only minimally adequate.

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?

The description adds meaningful semantics beyond the input schema, which has 0% description coverage. It explains that 'account_id' is a Meta Ads account ID with a specific format (act_XXXXXXXXX) and that 'access_token' is optional, clarifying usage that isn't evident from the schema alone. This compensates well for the low schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Get pages associated with a Meta Ads account.' It specifies the verb ('Get') and resource ('pages'), but does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'search_pages_by_name' or explain how this differs from general account information tools.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention sibling tools like 'search_pages_by_name' or 'get_account_info', nor does it specify prerequisites or contexts for usage beyond the basic parameters.

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