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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering safety traits. The description adds the behavioral detail that accounts are composed of user+environment and are specific to this installation, which provides context beyond the annotations.

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?

One concise sentence delivers the purpose and a key definition, with no redundancy or filler. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

The tool is simple with rich annotations, but the description does not explain the optional 'account' parameter or describe the output format, and there is no output schema. The description is adequate for basic understanding but leaves the parameter semantics ambiguous.

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 schema has 0% coverage for the single optional 'account' parameter, and the description does not explain its purpose or expected values. The description only defines what an account is, but does not clarify how the parameter filters or influences the result, which is a gap for the agent.

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 clearly states the tool lists HiveCloud accounts connected to the installation, with a specific definition of an account as user+environment. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that handle CTE, MDFE, NFe, etc., and clearly indicates the resource and action.

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?

The description implies the tool is for listing accounts but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. There is no guidance on when another tool (like hivecloud_list_empresas) would be more appropriate.

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