get_social_analytics

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 a requirement ('Requires Premium plan'), which is useful, but lacks details on rate limits, authentication needs, data freshness, or error handling. For a data retrieval tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding operational constraints.

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 concise and front-loaded, stating the core purpose in the first sentence and adding a critical constraint in the second. Both sentences earn their place by providing essential information without redundancy.

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 the complexity (4 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is moderately complete. It covers the purpose and a key requirement but lacks details on return values, error cases, and behavioral traits. Without an output schema, the agent must infer the analytics structure from the description's metric examples, which is insufficient for full understanding.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so parameters are well-documented in the schema itself. The description doesn't add any additional meaning beyond what's in the schema (e.g., it doesn't explain parameter interactions or provide examples). This meets the baseline for high schema coverage but doesn't enhance understanding.

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 with specific verbs ('Get account-level analytics') and resources ('social profiles'), listing key metrics like follower count and engagement rates. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate this from sibling tools like 'get_post_analytics' or 'get_post', which might handle different analytics scopes.

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?

The description provides some usage context by stating 'Requires Premium plan', which indicates a prerequisite. However, it doesn't offer explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_post_analytics' or 'get_post', leaving the agent to infer based on the 'account-level' focus.

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