listAccounts

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only restates the core function without disclosing behavioral traits such as pagination, ordering, or response structure. While 'all' hints at no built-in filtering, there is no mention of limits, error conditions, or authentication requirements.

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 sentence that immediately states the action and resource with no filler. It is appropriately minimal for a zero-parameter tool.

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?

The tool is simple with no parameters and an output schema that likely defines the return structure. The description clarifies scope ('all') and includes the synonym 'environments', which is sufficient given the context signals, though it could explicitly state that accounts and environments are equivalent.

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 input schema has zero parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly avoids inventing parameter details, and no further elaboration is needed.

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 identifies the resource as 'accounts/environments', with 'all' indicating full scope. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like getAccountsByStack (filtered by stack) and getAccount (single account).

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 all accounts/environments, so its usage is somewhat implicit. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives or mention exclusions, leaving some inference to the agent.

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