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

Although annotations already declare this tool as read-only, non-destructive, and idempotent, the description adds substantial behavioral context. It explains `schedule_custody`, what an empty result means, that connecting requires a browser sign-in the API cannot perform, and how to interpret a subsequent 403 from `prepare_post` as missing `social:publish` permission rather than a bad account id.

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 definition is dense but front-loaded: it first states what is returned, then WHEN to use it, then explains the key return fields, edge cases, and permission caveats. Every sentence contributes operational guidance, including the empty-list and 403 scenarios.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the return-value burden and does so adequately by naming `id`, `connect_url`, `platform`, and `schedule_custody` and explaining their significance. It also covers the main failure modes an agent would encounter around connecting and publishing permissions.

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?

There are zero input parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter syntax, and it uses the space instead to describe returned fields and operational meaning.

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 and resource: it returns connected social accounts for publishing, including the id `prepare_post` needs and a `connect_url`. It clearly distinguishes this read-only discovery tool from the related posting tools `prepare_post` and `publish_post`.

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 explicit WHEN guidance: before any posting attempt and whenever the user asks where they can post. It also covers the empty-list case, instructs the agent to stop and share `connect_url` rather than retry, and explains the permission distinction versus `prepare_post`/`publish_post`.

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