add_account

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

The description explains cookie file handling and persona constraints, but lacks details on proxy, is_active, and target_keywords behavior. No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden, but it is incomplete for all parameters.

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 concise, with four sentences covering key information. It front-loads the main action and uses clear language. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

While the tool has an output schema, reducing the need to describe returns, the description omits explanation for half the parameters and does not cover prerequisites or side effects beyond the mentioned file operations. The core action is clear, but completeness is limited.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It only describes two parameters (cookie_file and persona) in detail, leaving four parameters (proxy, is_active, target_keywords) with no explanation of their purpose or constraints.

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 clearly states the tool adds an account, specifying the target file, validation, backup, and atomicity. It distinguishes from siblings like update_account and remove_account by implying addition only.

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 use for adding accounts but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like update_account or remove_account. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance provided.

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