Get Connection Accounts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It clearly signals a read-only listing operation, but does not mention possible pagination, empty results, or whether the connection must be active. Basic behavior is transparent, but deeper behavioral context is absent.

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 a concise single sentence with no filler or redundant wording. It front-loads the verb and resource, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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 read-only tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential invocation context: list accounts scoped to a specific bank connection. It does not explain output shape or pagination, but the tool's low complexity reduces the need for additional explanation.

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 single parameter is already fully documented by the input schema with 100% coverage. The description adds no extra meaning about the parameter's format, source, or interpretation, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 clear verb ('List') and resource ('accounts') with a specific scope ('for a specific bank connection'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from generic account-listing siblings like list_accounts by emphasizing the connection scoe, though it does not name that sibling explicitly.

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 phrase 'for a specific bank connection' implies the tool is used when an agent already has a connection and needs its accounts, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or distinction from list_accounts. Usage is inferable rather than directly stated.

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