novada_proxy_account_list

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

Description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: wire format (multipart/form-data), auth requirements (NOVADA_DEVELOPER_API_KEY fallback), and parameter details like status filter and exact-match filter. No contradictions with annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint).

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?

Extremely concise, structured with bullet-like lines. First line states purpose, second gives best-for, third details parameters. No wasted words—every sentence 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?

Covers purpose, use cases, parameters, wire format, and auth. Missing response format details (no output schema), but for a read-only list tool, this is adequate. Minor gap but still robust.

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 coverage is 100%, but description adds extra meaning: notes that product codes are same as create, clarifies API field names (limit vs page_size, account vs username), and mentions limit max of 200. This adds value beyond schema.

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?

Description starts with 'List proxy sub-accounts' which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like novada_proxy_account_create by focusing on listing, and adds context about wrapping a POST API.

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?

States 'Best for: Auditing sub-accounts, finding account names before rotating credentials', giving clear use-case guidance. While it doesn't explicitly say when not to use, the context is sufficient for selection.

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