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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds that only user-authorized accounts are returned, which is useful scoping context, but it says nothing about pagination, ordering, or what happens when no accounts exist.

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?

Two short sentences: the first states what it returns, the second front-loads the calling instruction. No redundant or filler wording.

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?

For a zero-required-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose and call sequencing adequately. A brief note on the shape of the returned IDs/names would make it complete.

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% and the single optional 'language' enum is fully documented in the schema. The description adds no meaning about the parameter, which is acceptable given the schema does the work, but there is no extra value either.

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 client folders and ad accounts the user has made available to AI in Go Shift.' This clearly distinguishes it from all sibling tools, which deal with campaigns, budgets, GA4, GTM, etc. rather than account discovery.

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?

'Call this first to discover account IDs and folder names' gives explicit sequencing guidance and the purpose of the output. It stops short of naming alternatives, but no sibling overlaps so the routing risk is low.

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