list_accounts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It transparently describes the scope ('accounts this API key has access to') and the output contents (id, name, slug, owner status). The 'list' wording clearly indicates a read-only operation, and no side-effect concerns are relevant for this simple tool.

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 two short sentences. The first sentence states the primary purpose, and the second adds useful detail about entry contents. There is no fluff or redundant information.

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 list tool with no parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers the essential information: what is listed and what fields each entry contains. It does not need to explain return values or parameter behavior, and the sibling tool names provide sufficient context.

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 is empty (0 parameters), so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description correctly omits parameter details, and the baseline for a 0-parameter tool is 4.

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 accounts accessible by the API key, with a specific verb ('list') and resource ('accounts'). It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools whoami and switch_default_account, but the action and scope are evident, making this strong but not fully differentiated.

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 when to use the tool (when you need to enumerate accounts) but offers no explicit guidance on alternatives or exclusions. The sibling tools are different in purpose, but the description does not actively direct the agent toward this one.

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