List billing accounts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered, yet the description adds real value: an authentication prerequisite, the exact fields returned (id, organization name, billing email, currency, status), the Active/Suspended/Canceled enumeration, and which account is currently active. It stops short of stating side effects or pagination, but there are none expected for a zero-arg list tool.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with what is listed, then the auth prerequisite, then the downstream action. Every sentence carries distinct information with no restatement of the name or title.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields and status values plus the 'currently active' flag. Combined with the auth prerequisite and sibling routing, nothing needed to call this tool correctly is missing.

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 takes no parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies; the description correctly implies no filtering or input is required. There is no filter syntax or scoping option to explain.

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 (List) and resource (billing accounts/organizations), and disambiguates by clarifying parenthetically that accounts are organizations. It also situates itself among siblings by naming accounts_use as the follow-up action, so an agent can separate it from accounts_create without opening schemas.

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?

Explicit prerequisites ('Requires a prior platform login (use the login tool first)') and explicit next-step routing ('pick one with accounts_use before creating or listing projects'). Both when-to-use and the relevant alternative are stated, not implied.

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