list_accounts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the returned fields but omits details like pagination, error behavior, or auth requirements. For a read-only list tool, this level of disclosure is moderate but not comprehensive.

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 consists of two short, informative sentences with the verb front-loaded and no redundant words. Every part earns its place.

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 simple list tool, the description adequately covers purpose and return fields, which is especially useful given the absence of an output schema. It lacks details on pagination or limits, but the overall context is reasonably complete relative to the tool's simplicity.

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 has one parameter (workspace_id) with 0% description coverage. The tool description does not explain the parameter's meaning or add any semantic nuance beyond the self-explanatory name and uuid format, leaving the compensation gap unfilled.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('connected social accounts'), and the scope ('in a workspace'), distinguishing it from sibling list tools like list_workspaces and list_posts.

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 provides clear context by specifying the workspace scope and the returned fields (platform, username, primary flag, connection status), which implies when to use it. It does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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