myob_list_accounts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions routing scope (JWT, tenant, company) but fails to state whether the operation is read-only, if it returns all accounts or supports pagination, rate limits, or any other behavioral traits. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotations.

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 short (two sentences) but the first sentence is a tautology and the second focuses on routing rather than tool functionality. It is concise in word count but not effectively structured to convey value to an agent.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return structure might be documented there, but the description does not mention what the tool returns (e.g., a list of accounts) or how to use the 'arguments' parameter. For a list operation, critical context is missing, making it incomplete for an agent to use correctly.

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 sole parameter 'arguments' is described only as a 'JSON string of arguments for the connector operation'. The schema already indicates it is a string with default '{}', and the description adds no detail about what keys or values are expected. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description should compensate but does not.

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 essentially restates the tool name as 'Myob connector operation list_accounts' without specifying what 'accounts' refers to (e.g., chart of accounts, bank accounts). It adds routing infrastructure details that do not clarify the tool's core purpose, and fails to distinguish it from sibling myob tools like myob_list_contacts or myob_list_invoices.

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. There is no mention of scenarios where listing accounts is appropriate, nor any exclusions or references to other list tools among the siblings.

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