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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden; it does disclose the post-condition that the account can no longer publish, which is useful behavioral context. However it does not say whether scheduled/draft posts, historical analytics, or campaign associations are lost, nor whether the disconnect is reversible via connect_content_account.

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, front-loaded with the action and its effect, with the gating precondition last. Nothing is wasted and nothing relevant is missing.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers purpose and the approval gate but leaves the agent guessing about irreversible data loss and parameter sourcing. Adequate as a minimum-viable definition, with clear gaps.

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?

There is one parameter with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never references account_id — not its format, nor how to obtain it (e.g., from list_content_accounts). The agent must infer parameter sourcing entirely from context.

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?

Specific verb+resource ("Remove the publishing account") plus the operational consequence ("can no longer publish posts"), which distinguishes it from connect_content_account, list_content_accounts, and preview_disconnect_content_account. An agent can identify the tool and its effect without opening the 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?

Explicitly gates invocation on prior user approval of preview_disconnect_content_account, which is the key ordering constraint for this family of destructive tools. It stops short of naming other alternatives (e.g., list_content_accounts for discovery or reconnect paths), but the primary when-to-use condition is stated.

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