List all Dietbox accounts linked to this install.
Returns each account's id, email, label, and an "is_default" flag (true when only one is linked — no need to pass account in other tools). When multiple accounts are linked, every other dietbox_* tool accepts an optional account parameter; pass id, email, or label (full or partial).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| account | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds significant behavioral details beyond annotations: it specifies the returned fields, explains the is_default flag's significance, and describes how the account parameter works across tools. No contradiction with annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false).
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 concise (two sentences) and front-loads the main purpose. Every sentence adds value, efficiently conveying what the tool does and how it relates to the broader toolset.
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?
Given the low complexity (1 optional parameter, read-only) and no output schema, the description fully covers what the tool returns and the meaning of the is_default flag. It provides enough context for correct usage.
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 input schema has an optional 'account' parameter, but the description does not clarify its purpose for this specific tool. It only mentions the account parameter in the context of other tools. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate by explaining the parameter's role here.
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 lists all Dietbox accounts linked to the install and specifies the returned fields (id, email, label, is_default). It also distinguishes from siblings by explaining how the account parameter relates to other dietbox_* 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?
The description explains when to use the tool (to list accounts) and provides context for the is_default flag and the account parameter usage in other tools. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.