List ad accounts, optionally by connection or managed flag

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and external-facing behavior are covered. Beyond that the description only repeats the HTTP endpoint (GET /v1/ad-accounts) and says nothing about pagination, result ordering, or what a listing contains, despite there being no output 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?

A single short sentence with no filler and the filter dimensions front-loaded after the verb. It is efficient, but the brevity comes at the cost of substance rather than being tight-but-complete.

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 read-only list tool this is thin: no output schema exists, so the description should at minimum indicate the returned shape and pagination behavior, and it should say how this differs from adAccounts_get/manage/sync. None of that is present, leaving the agent with little more than the tool name.

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 carries the full burden. It maps the two parameters at a name level (connectionId filters by connection, managed filters by managed flag) but never explains what a 'connection' is, what 'managed' means for an ad account, or that the values are the strings 'true'/'false' rather than booleans.

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 the verb and resource ('List ad accounts') and names the two filter dimensions, so the basic purpose is clear. However, it is nearly a verbatim restatement of the title and gives no differentiation from nearby siblings such as adAccounts_get, adAccounts_manage, or adAccounts_sync, which an agent must distinguish before choosing this tool.

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 word 'optionally' hints that both parameters can be omitted, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives like adAccounts_get for a single account or adAccounts_sync for refreshing data. The agent is left to infer routing entirely from tool names.

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