List configured Amazon SP-API accounts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds a valuable behavioral guarantee: 'Credentials are never returned.' This goes beyond annotations by addressing a security-relevant aspect of the tool's behavior, critical for an agent deciding to invoke it.

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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the core action ('List safe account metadata') and includes just enough detail about the returned fields and a critical safety note. No waste.

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 list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what the agent needs to know: what the tool does, what it returns, and a safety guarantee. The sibling tools are more complex, and this description is sufficiently complete for its simple role.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the description correctly focuses on output content (account names, regions, marketplace participations). With 0 params, the baseline is 4, and the description provides appropriate context about what the list will contain.

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 clearly states the tool's function: listing safe account metadata (account names, regions, marketplace participations). It also adds a key differentiator by explicitly stating credentials are never returned, which distinguishes it from sibling tools that deal with operations, artifacts, or reports.

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 description implies the tool is for retrieving account information with no parameters, making usage straightforward. It doesn't explicitly exclude alternatives or state when-not-to-use, but the context is clear for a simple list operation. Given no exclusions are needed, a score of 4 is appropriate.

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