list_accounting_accounts

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden for behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context that the tool returns standard accounts if the SYSCOHADA chart is not initialized. However, it does not mention permissions, side effects, or any response details, though as a list operation this is less critical.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and immediately followed by a relevant edge case. Every sentence adds value with zero fluff.

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 one optional parameter and no output schema. The description covers the main purpose and an edge case, but it omits the limit parameter's semantics, leaving a gap in completeness. The description is adequate but not fully comprehensive.

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 has one optional parameter 'limit' with no description (0% coverage). The description does not mention this parameter at all, leaving the agent to infer its meaning solely from the parameter name. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 clearly states it lists the accounts of the SYSCOHADA chart of accounts, with a specific verb ('Lister') and resource ('comptes du plan comptable SYSCOHADA'). It also adds a behavioral edge case (returns standard accounts if not initialized), which helps distinguish it from other accounting list tools.

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 provides clear context about what the tool does, but it does not explicitly state when to use it compared to siblings like get_chart_of_accounts or list_accounting_journals. No exclusions or alternatives are mentioned, so the usage guidance is only implied.

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