Cuentas conectadas

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, but the description says 'Con predeterminada fija cuál usar cuando no se indica cuenta' and the parameter is a user_id 'a fijar como predeterminada', implying a persistent write operation. This directly contradicts the read-only annotation.

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?

Two short sentences with no wasted words: the first establishes the listing scope, the second explains the optional parameter. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized.

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 one-parameter tool this is mostly adequate, but there is no output schema and the description does not describe what a returned 'cuenta' contains or whether listing is paginated. The dual read/write ambiguity also leaves context incomplete.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds the contextual meaning that predeterminada sets which account to use when no account is specified. This goes beyond the schema's plain 'user_id de la cuenta a fijar como predeterminada'.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Lista las cuentas de MercadoLibre conectadas' and adds multi-store context. It does not explicitly compare itself to sibling tools like ml_conectar or ml_desconectar, but the listing purpose is 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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool instead of alternatives such as ml_conectar or ml_desconectar. The description only explains the effect of the optional parameter, not tool selection or prerequisites.

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