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

Annotations only say the operation is not read-only and not destructive; the description adds substantial behavior: the out-of-band consent flow, in-chat connect button and reporting, external_ref filtering, account cap failure pointing to billing, and platform-specific differences (Instagram's own login vs. Facebook's every-Page behavior).

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?

Several dense sentences, each carrying distinct information: purpose, recipient flow, in-chat behavior, external ref, account cap, and platform nuances. The most important purpose is front-loaded and there is no filler.

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 4-parameter tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it conveys the returned artifact informally ('Get a link'), the flow, the reporting behavior, the cap failure mode, and platform quirks. Nothing essential for an agent to choose or invoke this tool correctly is missing.

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 covers all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds real value by explaining external_ref's purpose ('so list_social_accounts can be filtered by it later') and platform-specific behavior for the platform parameter. It does not add semantics for expires_in or return_url, but those are already fully described in the schema.

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?

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get a link that connects a new Instagram, Facebook or TikTok account to the user's Post Bridge account.' It states the core action, the resource, and the key distinction ('without them opening the dashboard'), which separates it from the upload/link 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?

It gives clear context on who should receive the link and what happens after: the account owner approves on the platform's consent screen and is sent back. It does not explicitly say 'do not use for uploading or existing accounts' or name a when-not alternative, so it stops short of a 5.

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