List accessible customers

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the 'configured refresh token' as an auth context and indicates a read-only list operation by saying 'List'. However, it does not disclose pagination, rate limits, error behavior, or the exact response structure beyond 'resource names'.

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 single, focused sentence that is front-loaded with the action ('List') and resource. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or extraneous detail.

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 that this is a parameterless list operation with a simple purpose, the description is largely complete. It identifies the output ('resource names') and the auth context. However, the absence of an output schema means the description could have been more explicit about the exact response format, but the level of detail is adequate for a simple tool.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, and there is no ambiguity in invocation since no arguments are required.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'accessible customers' (Google Ads customer account resource names). It also specifies the scope ('reachable with the configured refresh token'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that target campaigns, ad groups, or keywords.

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 implies usage when needing to discover accessible customer accounts, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like search_gaql or other list tools. There is no mention of exclusions or complementary tools, so guidance is only implied.

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