gbp_list_accounts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose that only accounts accessible to the authenticated user are returned, which is useful, but it omits pagination behavior despite the presence of pageSize and pageToken parameters. No mention is made of what the response contains or how to handle multiple pages.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word contributes to the core meaning, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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 has no output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain enough for an agent to invoke it and interpret results. It covers the basic purpose and auth scoping but leaves out pagination handling and the shape of the returned account list, which are important for a complete call.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no information about pageSize or pageToken. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description does not compensate for the lack of schema-level documentation, so the agent must guess at pagination semantics.

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 a specific verb ('Lists') and resource ('Google Business Profile accounts accessible to the authenticated user'), making it immediately clear what the tool does. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like gbp_list_locations and ga4_list_accounts by naming the product and resource exactly.

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 when to use the tool—whenever a list of GBP accounts is needed—but provides no explicit guidance about alternatives or exclusions. It does not mention that location-level operations should go to gbp_list_locations, nor does it state a preference for when to call this tool first.

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