set_default_m365_account

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the main effect (affecting M365 and Teams tools when no account is specified) but omits persistence, reversibility, required permissions, and what happens if no account is connected.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It expresses the tool's purpose and effect efficiently.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description should do more. Most critically, it never explains how the account is chosen despite the tool having zero input parameters, nor does it mention prerequisites such as listing or connecting an account first. This leaves an agent unclear on how to invoke it correctly.

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. The description references an `account` parameter belonging to other tools, which clarifies the concept but does not need to document parameters for this tool.

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 action and effect: choosing which connected Microsoft 365 account becomes the default for M365 and Teams tools when no explicit account is given. It is clear but does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as list_m365_accounts or connect_m365_account.

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 by explaining the condition under which the default applies ('when no `account` is given'), but it does not say when to call this tool versus alternatives, nor does it state prerequisites like needing a connected account first.

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