list_ad_accounts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It clearly indicates the operation is a read/list action and enumerates the returned fields, but it does not mention pagination, potential rate limits, or explicitly confirm that no data is modified.

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 two sentences with no filler. The core action and scope are front-loaded, followed by the returned fields and concrete use cases, so every sentence earns its place.

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 simple list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the resource, return fields, and typical use cases well. It could be slightly more complete with an explicit note on pagination or read-only behavior, but nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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?

All three parameters are fully documented in the input schema with 100% coverage, so the schema already handles parameter semantics. The description adds no additional meaning about type, status, or includeTest beyond what the schema provides, matching the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 a clear resource ('LinkedIn Ad Accounts accessible to the authenticated user'), and states the returned fields. The 'all accounts' scope and the 'find a specific account ID' use case distinguish it from more targeted sibling tools like get_account_details.

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 usage context: get an overview of all accounts or locate a specific account ID. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, but the intended scenarios are clear enough for an agent.

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