list_connected_accounts

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

There are no annotations, so the description is the sole source of behavioral information. It discloses that the output includes 'connection status,' adding useful context beyond the verb 'List.' While it does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, the nature of 'List' makes that clear, and no side effects are implied.

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 exactly two sentences: the first states the tool's purpose and scope, the second provides usage context. Every clause earns its place with no wasted words, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 simple list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers the needed context: what is listed (specific platforms), the scope (QPost account), and a key attribute of the output (connection status). The sibling tools are all about posts, so there is no ambiguity about when this tool is relevant.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 per the rubric. The description correctly does not spend space on parameters, as there is nothing to explain.

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' with a clear resource ('the social media accounts... currently connected to this QPost account') and mentions the key detail of including connection status. It is clearly distinct from the sibling tools, which all operate on posts rather than account connections.

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 gives explicit guidance: 'Call this before creating a post to know which platforms are actually available.' This tells the agent exactly when to use the tool and why, which is sufficient for a tool with no relevant siblings.

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