api_indexer_search_for_accounts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden but adds minimal behavioral context. It mentions 'various criteria' but doesn't disclose pagination behavior (implied by 'nextToken' and 'itemsPerPage' in schema), rate limits, authentication needs, or what the search returns (e.g., list format). For a search tool with 8 parameters, this is inadequate.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. However, it's overly concise to the point of under-specification—it could benefit from slightly more detail (e.g., specifying 'Algorand accounts') without losing brevity.

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 the tool's complexity (8 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return format, pagination behavior, or error conditions. For a search tool in a crowded namespace, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents all 8 parameters. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema—it doesn't explain relationships between parameters (e.g., how 'limit' interacts with pagination) or provide examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Search for accounts with various criteria' clearly states the verb ('search') and resource ('accounts'), but it's vague about scope and doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'api_indexer_lookup_account_by_id' or 'api_algod_get_account_info'. It lacks specificity about what kind of accounts (e.g., Algorand blockchain accounts) or what 'various criteria' entails.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools for account lookup (e.g., 'api_indexer_lookup_account_by_id', 'api_algod_get_account_info'), the description offers no context about use cases, prerequisites, or comparisons. It's a generic statement that fails to help an agent choose appropriately.

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