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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond that: the per-platform `supports.slideshows` flag (TikTok only) and the no-accounts fallback behavior, both of which are non-obvious operational facts.

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?

Three short sentences, each doing distinct work: what it returns, how to use the ids, and the empty-state handling. The core purpose is front-loaded with zero 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?

With no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns, and it partially does (ids, supports.slideshows) but not the full shape (e.g., account names, platform identifiers, ordering). Adequate for a zero-param read tool, but not exhaustive.

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?

Zero input parameters, so the schema baseline of 4 applies; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate on the input side.

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 the TikTok and YouTube accounts the user connected') and scopes it to SendShort, which cleanly separates it from sibling listers like list_videos or list_shorts. The mention of Settings → Preferences even tells the agent where the underlying data originates.

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 forward ('Use the ids with schedule_short and schedule_slideshow') and covers the empty case ('ask the user to connect one'). It doesn't state when not to call it or name a competing alternative, so it stops short of a 5.

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