beel_list_accounts

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses the cursor/next_cursor pagination contract, the absence of a pagination block, the envelope behavior under data, and the termination condition when next_cursor is null. This is valuable behavioral context not present in the annotations or schema.

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?

Structured with a one-line summary, two focused filter bullets, and a short pagination paragraph. Core behavior is front-loaded, and every sentence earns its place without filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description covers the essentials: resource, ordering, returned fields, filter parameters, and a complete pagination loop ending at null next_cursor. The endpoint is included, so an agent has enough information to call and page through results 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?

The schema already documents limit, cursor, status, and external_ref, so the description's role is supplemental. It adds usage-level meaning: status narrows the list to one lifecycle stage and external_ref returns 0..1 matching accounts, plus how cursor chains to next_cursor. This is useful but not a heavy lift beyond the schema.

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?

Opens with an explicit verb/resource and scope: 'Returns the accounts you provisioned, newest first.' It also names the key payload fields and ordering, making it clearly distinguishable from singular beel_get_account and other list_* siblings.

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 gives clear context for when to use it—listing provisioned accounts with optional filters. It does not explicitly call out alternatives like beel_get_account, but the plural collection versus singular lookup distinction is implied strongly enough.

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