postifys_list_connections

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does this extensively: TikTok creator-inbox vs Direct Post requirements, LinkedIn member-profile-only limitation, Pinterest image-Pin-only plus required boardId, Video Pins not claimed, and entitlement/pricing constraints. This is far more than a generic 'list' statement.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by ID usage, platform caveats, and workflow guidance. The paragraph is dense and fairly long for a single-parameter list tool, but every sentence conveys a distinct constraint or workflow tip. The pricing detail could arguably live elsewhere, which keeps it from a 5.

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, so the description partially compensates by mentioning returned ID fields like pageId, instagramAccountId, and channelId. It also covers platform-specific limitations and the recommended media upload flow. It does not describe the exact response shape, pagination, or the sibling postifys_list_pinterest_boards tool for retrieving required boardId values, but overall it is sufficient 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 already documents the only parameter (platform) with an enum and a one-line description. The tool description adds per-platform behavioral semantics—TikTok Direct Post nuances, LinkedIn member profiles, Pinterest boardId requirements—giving each enum value practical meaning the schema alone lacks. Since schema coverage is already 100%, this is above the baseline but not exceptional.

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?

Opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List connected social accounts for publishing.' It immediately tells the agent what the tool returns and how to use the results (returned id fields as account targets), which also distinguishes it from the more specific sibling postifys_list_pinterest_boards.

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 clear context on when to use: call before publishing to obtain target IDs, and filter the results with the optional platform parameter. It includes workflow advice like 'Prefer Media upload → serve_url → Publish' and warns against passing raw Drive/Dropbox URLs. However, it does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools or say when not to use this tool.

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