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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful filtering context ('active' accounts, scoped to the active brand), but says nothing about pagination, ordering, or the returned shape.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though it is arguably too terse for a tool with an undocumented parameter and no output 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 should convey what is returned (e.g., account identifiers/names for use in publish_content). It gestures at 'active social accounts' but omits return structure and the brandId default behavior, leaving gaps an agent must guess at.

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?

The single brandId parameter has 0% schema description coverage, so the description must carry the load. It partially does by framing the result as belonging to the account's 'active brand', hinting that brandId is optional and defaults to that brand, but it never explains the parameter's format or what passing a different UUID 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?

States a clear verb+resource ('List active social accounts') and scopes it to the account's active brand, which distinguishes it from publish-history siblings like list_content_publishes and list_clip_publishes. However, it never names a sibling or clarifies the destination-vs-publish distinction explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as list_content_publishes. The only contextual clue is the phrase 'available to the account's active brand', which implies the pre-publish discovery step but leaves the agent to infer it.

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