list_ad_accounts

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses that it calls GET /adAccounts/pages and iterates through all pages ('전 페이지 순회'). This adds meaningful behavioral context about pagination and intended scope, which is not present in the annotation.

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, well-structured sentence with bold emphasis on '전체' (ALL) and includes the endpoint and pagination behavior. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 simple list tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what is listed, the access scope, the endpoint, and the pagination behavior. The output schema handles return value details, so no further elaboration is needed.

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 coverage is 100%: the only parameter, business_token, is fully described in the schema (defaults to login session if omitted, for override). The tool description adds no additional parameter information, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 specifies the verb ('list') and the resource ('ad accounts'), and emphasizes '전체' (ALL) to indicate the full scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_ad_account, which retrieves a single account.

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 context is clear: this tool lists all token-accessible ad accounts, implying use when a complete list is needed. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as 'use get_ad_account for a single account', so it lacks a direct when/when-not statement.

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