gws.accounts.add

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly=false, openWorld=true), the description reveals key behaviors: it opens the browser, returns a pendingId, and requires polling the complete function. It also notes that each account stores its own credentials, which is a stateful detail not in the annotations.

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 four sentences, each adding critical information: purpose, OAuth flow with pendingId, credentials storage, and org-specific configuration. No wasted words, and the main verb is front-loaded.

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?

The description covers the complete add-account flow, including the async nature, browser interaction, and follow-up poll step. It doesn't mention error cases or timeouts, but given the clear workflow and the schema's parameter descriptions, it is sufficient for an AI agent 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 schema already documents all three parameters with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context for clientId/clientSecret by noting that different organizations need their own credentials from that org's GCP project, which clarifies when these optional parameters matter.

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's function: 'Connect a new Google account via OAuth.' This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from siblings like reauth or remove, and the mention of gws.accounts.complete clarifies the workflow.

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?

It provides explicit guidance to call gws.accounts.complete to finalize the pending OAuth flow, and explains that different organizations require their own clientId/clientSecret from their GCP project. However, it doesn't explicitly say when to use reauth instead of add, though 'new account' implies it.

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