Create Google Account Slot

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

The description discloses that the tool generates a fresh pinned fingerprint and persistent profile but does not sign in, which is consistent with its purpose. Annotations include destructiveHint: true, but creating an account slot is not inherently destructive; the description does not contradict annotations, but it adds useful context about the creation process and return values.

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 well-structured with a header, summary paragraph, and detailed argument list. However, it is verbose with lengthy parameter explanations that could be trimmed slightly without losing clarity. Still, it is efficiently written for the complexity involved.

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?

For a tool with 17 parameters, no schema descriptions, and an output schema (though not detailed here), the description covers all parameters comprehensively and mentions return values (account id, resolved config, warnings). It is fully complete for an AI agent to understand and invoke the tool 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates fully by explaining every parameter's purpose, defaults, and allowed values (e.g., 'os: Defaults to server config', 'humanize: True (default in balanced) | False | float'). This adds significant value beyond the bare schema.

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 'Create a new managed account slot with a locked fingerprint + advanced config' and distinguishes it from sibling tools like gv_sign_in by explicitly noting the account is not signed in yet. This makes the primary purpose and its specific role clear.

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 explicitly guides the user to call gv_sign_in next, indicating a sequential workflow. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool (e.g., if an account already exists or for other scenarios), missing some exclusionary guidance.

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