switch_account

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds nothing beyond them: it never explains what happens to the current session/token, whether a new token is issued, or whether permissions/tenant scope change — the key behavioral facts for an account-switch 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?

It is short, but that shortness comes from duplication: 'Switch user account' appears in line one and again in line two, alongside a raw endpoint path. No sentence carries information beyond the tool name.

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 non-idempotent mutation with a nested required body (three identifiers), no output schema, and no description of the resulting state, the definition is incomplete. An agent cannot tell what switching an account actually changes about its current context.

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 100%, so email, tenantId, customerId and x-trace-id are all documented in the schema. The description adds no semantics about how these identifiers relate or which account is being entered, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

It names a specific verb and resource ('Switch user account'), so the basic action is clear. However, it does not distinguish this from look-alike siblings such as make_default_account or list_user_accounts, and the second line merely repeats the first, adding nothing.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus make_default_account, list_user_accounts, or generate_sso_token, nor any stated preconditions. The agent must infer the use case entirely from the name.

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