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

Goes well beyond the annotations: background execution, 15s–5min duration, one sync per workspace at a time, status lifecycle queued → running → completed/failed, and cost implications (daily sync limit, Free plan once per calendar month). The description does not contradict the readOnlyHint=false/openWorldHint=true/destructiveHint=false annotations.

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?

Front-loaded with the action, then constraints, then cost. It is dense and nearly every sentence carries actionable information, though the runtime/limit/polling details make it longer than strictly necessary for a single tool.

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 return-value burden and does so: an immediate job_id, its status progression, and when results become visible in the read tools. Combined with the cost and concurrency rules, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real semantics on top: job_id must be paired with the same workspace_id and returns progress without starting work, and platform omission means all connected platforms. It does not discuss idempotency_key, but the schema already does.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource ('Refreshes a workspace's post analytics') and enumerates the data covered (views, likes, comments, shares, account stats). It also anchors the operation to a concrete UI equivalent ('Sync button on the ShortSync Analytics tab'), which separates it from the analytics read siblings.

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 states when NOT to call it: the read tools (get_workspace_analytics, get_post_analytics, get_video_analytics, get_folder_analytics, explain_post_analytics_state) auto-sync stale data, so only call this when the user wants a refresh now. It also explains how to poll with job_id instead of starting a second sync.

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