slide_list_accounts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It conveys a read-only list operation and creation-date filtering, but does not mention pagination behavior, ordering, response shape, or any limits or side effects.

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 one sentence with no filler. It front-loads the verb and resource, and the parenthetical adds useful domain disambiguation without unnecessary length.

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 straightforward list operation with fully described parameters, this is adequate but not complete. The lack of annotations, output schema, and explicit sibling differentiation leaves gaps around expected return behavior and when another tool would be more appropriate.

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 100%, so the parameters are already fully documented with types, defaults, and enums. The description adds only the creation-date filtering concept, which does not meaningfully extend what the schema already states.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List Slide accounts', and clarifies the domain concept with 'top-level MSP/reseller billing entities'. This distinguishes it from related sibling tools like slide_get_account and slide_list_clients.

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?

There is no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as slide_get_account for a single account or slide_list_clients for client-level entities. The phrase 'top-level' implies hierarchy but no exclusions or alternative routing are stated.

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