ig_list_accounts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'authenticated' as a prerequisite but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, safe, or free of side effects. It also lacks details about response shape, pagination, or any other behavioral traits.

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 concise sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose. It contains no redundant words or unnecessary elaboration, earning its place effectively.

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?

While the tool is simple and has an output schema, the description fails to explain the required timezone parameter or any behavioral details. For a tool with zero schema coverage and no annotations, the description is insufficient to invoke it correctly, especially given the ambiguity around timezone.

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 has one required parameter, timezone, with no description (schema coverage is 0%). The description does not mention timezone at all, leaving its purpose and format entirely unexplained. This is a critical gap for a required parameter.

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 accounts for the authenticated IG client, using a specific verb ('list') and resource ('accounts'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ig_get_account_preferences, which focuses on preferences rather than account enumeration.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as ig_get_account_preferences or other IG tools. It does not mention prerequisites beyond authentication or any scenarios where this account list is particularly useful.

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