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

With empty annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses authentication scope, ordering ('newest first'), page size ('50 per page'), and the default 'every platform is included' behavior. It does not mention errors or output shape, but 'List' clearly implies a non-mutating read operation.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the action, resource, platforms, ordering, and pagination; the second clarifies platform-filter behavior. Every clause earns its place.

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?

This is a low-complexity list tool with zero required parameters and a fully described schema. The description covers authentication scope, platforms, ordering, pagination, and the default platform behavior – everything an agent needs to invoke it correctly. Since no output schema exists, the implicit return of account objects is acceptable for a list tool.

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 already documents both parameters at 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by stating the global ordering ('newest first') and the '50 per page' behavior, which complements the `page` parameter description and clarifies the `platform` omission behavior.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('the authenticated user's posting accounts'), and explicitly names the three platforms covered. The plural 'accounts' and pagination scope distinguish it from singular account tools like get-account-tool, and the verb clearly separates it from create/update/delete 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?

The description makes the tool's purpose obvious: retrieve a paginated list of posting accounts. It gives functional guidance on when to narrow to one platform via the `platform` parameter. However, it does not explicitly contrast with get-account-tool for single-account lookups or other list tools, so it falls 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.