List ledger accounts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds context about the relationship between ledger accounts and bookings/invoice lines, but says nothing about pagination, ordering, filtering, or response contents. With annotations covering the core behavior, this is acceptable but not rich.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the core operation, and the second provides relevant context about how ledger_account_id is used elsewhere. Every word earns its place.

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 a single optional parameter, a simple list operation, and annotations that cover safety and idempotency, the description is sufficient for basic invocation. It does not mention how to fetch a single ledger account or how this differs from related list tools, but those are not essential for a straightforward listing endpoint.

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 only parameter, administration_id, is fully documented in the input schema with 100% coverage. The description does not need to add parameter details, and the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'List the chart of accounts.' It adds useful context by noting that bookings and invoice lines reference these accounts by ledger_account_id. However, it does not differentiate this tool from the sibling list_financial_accounts or get_ledger_account, so it stops short of full clarity.

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 a use case: use this tool to find ledger accounts referenced by bookings and invoice lines. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives such as get_ledger_account for a single account or list_financial_accounts for a different account type.

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