Google accounts

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

The annotations cover readOnly=false, openWorld=true, and destructive=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond them: add opens a browser sign-in and handles expired sessions, remove revokes access, and set_default affects new spreadsheets. This gives the agent useful auth and side-effect awareness.

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 compact single paragraph with the general purpose front-loaded and each action explained in a clause. Every sentence contributes useful information without repetition.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description covers all actions, required parameters, sign-in behavior, revocation behavior, and default-account effects. For a two-parameter account-management tool, this is complete enough for correct invocation.

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 schema documents the email parameter but provides no description for the action enum. The description maps all four action values to their effects, adding essential meaning for the action parameter. Email semantics are already covered by the schema, so it does not add extra there.

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?

States the specific resource ('Google accounts Sheets MCP can use') and enumerates the four action subcommands. This clearly distinguishes it from all sibling spreadsheet tools, so an agent can identify its scope immediately.

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?

Provides per-action when-to-use guidance: list for signed-in/default accounts, add for sign-in or expired sign-in, remove to sign out/revoke access, and set_default for choosing the account used for new spreadsheets. The alternatives are internal to the action enum, so no sibling routing is needed.

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