Réseaux connectés

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden but only states what it lists. It doesn't disclose that the operation is read-only or safe, but the intent is clear. No contradictions with annotations (none provided).

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 a single concise sentence with no extraneous information. It is front-loaded and uses minimal words to convey the purpose effectively.

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?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It explains the output (list of networks) implicitly. Adding mention of return format would improve, but not strictly necessary.

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 parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but that's appropriate as the schema covers all (no 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 clearly states it lists social networks connected to the workspace and supported publishable networks. It uses a specific verb ('Liste') and resource ('réseaux sociaux connectés'), distinguishing it from sibling tools that focus on posting/scheduling.

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 implies usage when needing to view connected networks, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusion criteria. Sibling tool names suggest this is the standalone listing tool.

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