gcloud_iam_service_accounts_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the action is listing (presumably read-only, non-destructive), but does not mention any behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, rate limits, output format, or whether the project parameter is required. More detail is needed for safe invocation.

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, compact sentence that conveys the essential action and scope. No unnecessary words or repetition. Front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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?

Given the tool has only one optional parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is adequate but minimal. It lacks details about the output (e.g., what fields are returned), pagination, or permissions required, which are important for a complete understanding.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the only parameter ('project') well. The description does not add extra semantics beyond the schema, but with full schema coverage the baseline is 3, and the description's mention of 'current project' aligns with the schema's fallback behavior, earning a slight bonus.

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 the specific verb 'List' and resource 'IAM service accounts', clearly stating what the tool does. It also specifies the scope ('in the current project'), which distinguishes it from other listing tools. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like gcloud_storage_buckets_list or gcloud_run_services_list, but the resource type is distinct enough.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context (e.g., requiring IAM permissions), or when not to use it. Sibling tools include other list operations, but no exclusions or alternatives are given.

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