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 fully covered by structured data. The description adds genuine scoping context (results are restricted to active accounts and to the authenticated profile), but says nothing about ordering, count, or what makes an account "active".

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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb and the key qualifier ("only active"), with no filler or restatement of the title. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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 zero parameters, a full output schema, and complete annotations, this is close to sufficient. The remaining gap is that "active" is never defined (versus expired, revoked, or disconnected) and the contrast with list_accounts is left implicit.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. The description correctly avoids inventing filtering arguments that the empty schema does not support.

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?

"Lists only active connected accounts for the authenticated profile" gives a specific verb (lists) and resource (active connected accounts), and the word "only" signals the filtering distinction from the sibling list_accounts. It stops short of naming that sibling, so the differentiation must be inferred from the name alone.

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 phrase "only active" implies the usage context — call this instead of a general account listing when inactive/disconnected accounts are irrelevant — but no alternative tool is named and no explicit when-not-to-use condition is stated. Usage is inferable rather than spelled out.

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