list_accounts

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations: fixed synthetic snapshot, as_of recalculates elapsed time from the same dataset without refreshing records, generated drafts are never contacts, and missing contact history is explicitly unknown. These are non-obvious rules an agent could not infer from annotations or schema.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence and each subsequent sentence carries a distinct rule. Some fragments are telegraphic, but none are redundant with the schema or annotations.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and the filtering, default, and edge-case rules are well covered. The remaining gap is the meaning of stale_days relative to the 'contact threshold'.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does for two of three params: as_of semantics (null/omitted = snapshot, later value recalculates, empty strings invalid) and include_live's default exclusion of live accounts. stale_days is only obliquely referenced via 'contact threshold', leaving the threshold value itself unexplained.

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 and scope: find accounts past a contact threshold, ranked by planned launch date. This is enough for an agent to distinguish it from get_account_context, which plainly retrieves one account's context, though the description never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

Gives conditions (live accounts excluded by default, omit as_of for the snapshot) but never states when to choose this over get_account_context or check_readiness. Usage is implied by the filtering semantics rather than routed.

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