list_connections

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure. It discloses that the tool lists connected accounts and returns each account's connection ID, covering the primary behavior. It does not mention auth prerequisites or error conditions, but for a simple list operation with no parameters, this is adequate.

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, front-loaded with the core action in the first sentence and usage guidance in the second. No filler.

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?

The description covers what it does, what it returns, and how to use the result. Given the simple nature (zero params, no output schema) and the sibling tool context, the description is fully sufficient.

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 has no parameters (empty schema), so the baseline for this dimension is 4. The description adds value by explaining how the output (connection ID) is used in other tools' account_ids parameter, but this is not about its own parameters.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource as 'your connected social media accounts' with examples (TikTok, Instagram, YouTube). It clearly differentiates itself from publishing/scheduling siblings by explaining it returns connection IDs.

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 explicitly tells the user to pass the returned IDs to publish_now, schedule_post, and send_to_drafts via the account_ids parameter, and notes the specific condition 'when you have multiple accounts on the same platform.' This provides clear usage context and direct reference to alternative/succeeding tools.

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