accounts_list

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden, and it discloses the auth requirement, the returned field set including status enum values (Active/Suspended/Canceled), and which account is flagged active. It omits pagination, ordering, and error behavior, keeping it below a 5.

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 dense sentences that are front-loaded with the primary action, then prerequisites, then return/next-step guidance. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 no-parameter list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers purpose, auth prerequisite, return values, and the follow-up tool, which is everything an agent needs to invoke it correctly.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4 per the rubric. The empty schema leaves nothing for the description to clarify about inputs, and it correctly focuses on the (absent) output shape instead.

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) plus the scope restriction ('the logged-in user belongs to'). It is clearly distinct from siblings like accounts_create and accounts_use.

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?

Explicitly gives a prerequisite ('Requires a prior platform login — use the login tool first') and a downstream action ('pick one with accounts_use before creating or listing projects'). Names both the alternative tool and the condition that selects it.

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