List resource collections for an Accelo object using its type and ID. Retrieve collections for companies, contacts, issues, or jobs.
List resource collections for an object.
Args: object_type: The object type (e.g. "companies", "issues", "jobs", "contacts") object_id: The object's ID
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| object_id | Yes | ||
| object_type | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'List' implies a read operation, but it does not disclose pagination, auth needs, rate limits, filtering behavior, or return shape.
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, front-loaded with the action, and structured with clear argument labels. 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?
There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description should explain more about what collections are and what is returned. For a two-parameter list tool, this leaves key context missing.
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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It gives useful examples for object_type, but object_id is only restated as 'The object's ID' without adding format or constraint meaning.
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?
States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('resource collections') scoped to an object, with example object types. It does not distinguish this tool from siblings such as accelo_list_resources, so it falls short of a 5.
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 when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives are provided. The required arguments imply it needs an object, but nothing tells the agent when to choose this tool over related listing tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.