select-account

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the action 'select as default,' which implies a persistent state change, but does not disclose side effects (e.g., whether the previous default is replaced, whether authentication is required, or if the change is reversible). For a state-modifying tool with no annotation coverage, this is a moderate gap—not misleading, but incomplete.

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 sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, followed by accepted formats and a pointed reference to a sibling. Every word 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?

For a simple single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, accepted input, and a discovery path. There are no nested objects or complex edge cases to disclose, so it is complete for an agent to call it correctly.

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 coverage is 100% (the parameter description already states 'Email address or account ID'). The description adds a concrete example (user@outlook.com) and a discovery mechanism (use list-accounts), which goes slightly beyond the schema. It adds value by giving the agent a way to find valid values.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Select a Microsoft account as the default.' It also specifies the accepted identifier forms (email or account ID) and provides a concrete example. This clearly differentiates it from siblings like list-accounts (which discovers) and logout (which ends a session).

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?

Explicitly says to use list-accounts to discover available accounts, which routes the agent to the right discovery tool. However, it does not state when not to use this tool (e.g., when needing to log in or out) or list alternatives beyond list-accounts. The guidance is clear for the typical flow but lacks explicit exclusions.

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