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

The annotations already disclose readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description only adds household-scope context and no additional behavioral detail such as filtering defaults, result scope, or pagination, but it does not contradict 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 short but under-specified rather than genuinely concise. It has no structure that front-loads an action, scope, or key filtering behavior, and the brief sentence does not earn its place with useful operational content.

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?

Even though the output schema and annotations cover some structure and safety, the description leaves the list behavior, filtering semantics, and sibling-tool boundaries almost entirely undocumented. The agent would have to guess what accounts are returned and how status/household_id affect the result.

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 is expected to explain what status and household_id mean and how they affect the call. It only offers a weak hint that the resource is household-scoped and says nothing about status or accepted values.

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 is a noun phrase that mostly restates the resource named in the title. It does not say the tool lists anything, does not describe what accounts/custody means, and gives no way to distinguish it from sibling list_* tools.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool, what prerequisites apply, or when a sibling like list_households or list_facilities would be more appropriate. The description is not misleading, but it leaves usage entirely to inference.

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