list_accounts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety and idempotency profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds return-shape context ('JSON array of account objects with provider type, environment, and permissions') and the prerequisite role, which is useful but doesn't reveal pagination, size limits, or auth requirements.

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?

Three tight sentences: purpose, when-to-use, and return contents. Front-loaded with the verb and resource, no filler.

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 zero-param read-only list tool with annotations covering the behavioral profile and no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it states purpose, usage trigger, and return fields. Only minor gaps remain (e.g., whether pagination occurs, or whether results are cached).

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 takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies a parameterless enumeration by saying 'List all configured' with no filters mentioned.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List all configured Spinnaker accounts') and parenthetically clarifies what an account is ('cloud provider integrations'). This clearly distinguishes it from the singular sibling get_account and from other list_* tools targeting different resources.

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?

Provides clear usage context: 'Use this to discover available cloud accounts before querying infrastructure or deploying.' This tells the agent when to reach for it. It doesn't explicitly name get_account as the alternative for a single account, so not a full 5.

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