ghl_social_get_all_watermarks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful non-schema context: the required Sub-Account token, the socialplanner/watermarks.readonly scope, and that each template surfaces accountIds. Auth and scope disclosure exceed what annotations provide.

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?

Front-loaded with a clear title and purpose sentence, then supporting auth/pagination notes. The endpoint/version/source metadata line is low-value clutter for an agent, keeping it short of a 5, but the rest 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?

With no output schema, the description usefully explains that returned templates expose connected accounts via accountIds, and covers auth and pagination. A read-only list tool is adequately specified, though it could note result shape or default page size.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the schema already documents name, skip, limit, and locationId. The description reinforces pagination usage ('pass them to page through full result sets') but adds little syntax or format detail beyond the schema, and does not mention the name search filter.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List watermark templates', 'Retrieve a paginated list of watermark templates for a specific location'), so the agent knows exactly what it returns. It doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings like ghl_social_get_watermark (singular) or create/update/delete, but the 'list' framing makes the distinction inferable.

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 operational context: requires a Sub-Account (location) token, scoped to a locationId, and directs the agent to the Get Accounts endpoint to resolve account IDs. It also notes limit/skip are for paging full result sets. It stops short of explicitly stating when to use this vs ghl_social_get_watermark for a single template.

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