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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: the returned field set (compensating for the absent output schema), the workspace-vs-user account scope, and the 'active' status requirement for publishing. It does not mention pagination or result-size limits, which keeps it short of a 5.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then returns, then call-order, then filtering guidance. No sentence is redundant and none restates the schema.

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 compensates by listing the returned fields and the field that gates publishing. Optional filters, scope, and call sequencing are all covered; pagination is the only unaddressed item and the narrowing guidance implies it is not needed here.

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 meaning beyond the schema by framing all three filters as a single narrowing strategy for large workspaces ('Workspaces can hold many accounts'), which tells the agent when to combine them rather than how each is typed.

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 social media accounts') plus the exact scope ('connected to the authenticated user or current team workspace'), and enumerates the returned fields. An agent can distinguish this from sibling tools like list_pools or search without opening a schema.

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?

Gives explicit call-order guidance ('Call this first to discover which accountIds can be used in create_post'), a when-not-to-read-everything rule ('narrow with platform, tag or search instead of reading the whole list'), and a prerequisite rule ('Only accounts with status active can publish').

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