linkedin get setup guide

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the non-obvious fact that this is a prerequisite read for write preparation, which is genuine context beyond the annotations. It does not need to explain returns since an output schema exists.

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 filler. It is terse to the point of being slightly clipped ('Read account, supported formats...'), but every clause carries information.

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?

With an output schema, full parameter documentation, and rich annotations, the description only needs to state purpose and timing. It does both, leaving little an agent needs that isn't already structured.

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?

One parameter with 100% schema description coverage, including the LINKEDIN_ADS_ACCOUNT_IDS constraint, so the schema does the work. The description adds nothing about adAccountId semantics; baseline 3 applies.

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 verb 'Read' is paired with three concrete resources: account, supported formats, and native LinkedIn write requirements. It is distinguishable from siblings like linkedin_get_account_details because it returns setup/format guidance rather than raw account data, though the description never states that distinction explicitly.

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?

'before preparing changes' implies the trigger condition (use prior to authoring mutations), which is real usage context. But no alternatives are named and no exclusion is given, so the agent must infer whether this replaces or supplements linkedin_get_account_details.

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