ac_RegisterAdsAccount

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions permission requirements but fails to specify them, leaving critical access control information missing. It doesn't describe what happens on success/failure, whether the account creation is reversible, or any rate limits/quotas.

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 description is brief but front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the incomplete permission section ("[]") wastes space without adding value. The structure could be improved by either removing the empty permission list or filling it with actual requirements.

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 creation tool with no annotations but 100% schema coverage and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It states the purpose but lacks important behavioral context like permission details, error conditions, and success criteria. The output schema existence reduces but doesn't eliminate the need for some behavioral description.

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 the schema already documents all 4 parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema. It doesn't explain relationships between parameters or provide usage examples.

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 clearly states the tool creates a new advertising account and specifies the types of entities it can be tied to (Amazon vendor, seller, author, or non-Amazon business). It distinguishes itself from siblings like ac_ListAdsAccounts (list vs create) and ac_GetAccount (retrieve vs create). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all siblings with similar verbs like ac_CreateTermsToken.

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 mentions the tool requires specific permissions but leaves the permission list empty ("[]"), providing no actionable guidance. It doesn't explain when to use this tool versus alternatives like ac_CreateTermsToken or what prerequisites exist beyond the incomplete permission hint.

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