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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond what annotations provide, which is acceptable but not enhanced.

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?

The description is a single sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. It is concise with no wasted words, though it could be more informative without losing conciseness.

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 and moderate complexity (3 parameters, one nested object), the description should explain what the response contains (e.g., list of social connection IDs, names, platforms) and note any pagination or filtering behavior. It lacks this context, making it incomplete for an AI agent to understand the return value.

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 description coverage is 67%, with descriptions for 'workspace_id' and 'query' (minimal). The description does not explain the parameters (e.g., brand_id's role). It adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not compensate for gaps.

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 'List available social connections for publishing' clearly states the action (list) and the resource (social connections) with a specific scope (for publishing). It distinguishes from siblings like 'aidelly_list_accounts' by specifying 'social connections' and 'for publishing', though it doesn't elaborate on what qualifies as a social connection.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'aidelly_list_accounts' or 'aidelly_list_connect_link_connections'. There are no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or prerequisite statements.

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