marketplace_create_developer_account

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

Annotations already disclose the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, openWorldHint=true). The description adds a genuinely useful behavioral note that the upstream partner token is redacted from the response, but it omits the implications of non-idempotency and whether 'plan' is a safe dry-run.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded and the redaction caveat as a compact follow-up. Nothing is padded.

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, open-world mutation tool with a nested required object and no output schema, the description is thin: it omits mode semantics, field expectations, permission requirements, and what 'plan' returns relative to 'apply'. The single redaction note does not cover these gaps.

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 0%, and the schema exposes a nested 'account' object with eight properties (name, email, phone, title, legal_type, description, website_url, partner_token) that are entirely undocumented anywhere. The description only faintly implies the mode enum via 'Plan or create' and gives no field-level semantics.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Plan or create a developer account'), which is clear enough to distinguish it from siblings like update/delete_developer_account. However, it leaves the meaning of 'plan' vs 'create' and their mapping to the mode enum implicit, so the precise operation is still somewhat ambiguous.

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 use this tool versus siblings such as marketplace_update_developer_account or marketplace_create_application. Critically, it never explains when to use mode='plan' versus mode='apply', which is the central decision an agent must make before calling.

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