list_accounts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the full burden of explaining behavior. It only states 'List all accounts' without disclosing that the optional 'type' parameter filters results, whether results are paginated, or any ordering or read-only guarantees. This is a minimal disclosure that omits relevant behavioral details.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded, stating the core action in the first three words. However, the brevity comes at the cost of omitting the filtering parameter and any usage guidance, so it is efficient but slightly incomplete.

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 tool with one optional filtering parameter and no output schema, the description is not complete enough. An agent cannot tell whether this endpoint returns all accounts regardless of type or supports filtering, and no alternative or behavior is mentioned. The bare phrase leaves significant context to be inferred from the schema and sibling names.

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 introduces no meaning for the optional 'type' parameter. The tool name could easily lead an agent to ignore the filter entirely, and the description does not compensate for the schema's lack of explanatory text. With no parameter documentation in the description, the agent gains no semantic value beyond the raw enum.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'List all accounts.' It is unambiguous in its intent, but it does not differentiate itself from siblings like get_account or list_transactions, relying on the 'accounts' resource to imply its scope.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_account for a single account or list_transactions for filtering transactions. There are no stated use cases, exclusions, or distinguishing context, leaving an agent to infer appropriate usage from the name alone.

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