List accounts

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

With annotations declaring readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, the safety profile is already known. The description adds valuable context by specifying the exact return format (JSON array of {id, descr} objects) with an example, which goes beyond 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 a single, compact sentence that front-loads the purpose and includes a concrete example. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's output, with no unnecessary fluff.

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?

This is a simple read-only list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description fully specifies the return structure with an example, making it complete for an agent to understand what to expect without needing additional return-type documentation.

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 schema covers the only parameter 'doc' with a full description, so the description does not need to add parameter details. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 returns a list of accounts as a JSON array of {id, descr} objects, which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like banana_account_description or banana_account_card by focusing on the full list retrieval.

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 the full list of accounts is needed, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool. There is no direct comparison to sibling tools such as banana_account_description for individual account lookups.

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