list_accounts

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

Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and non-destructive. The description adds one useful behavioral detail: subtype filtering happens locally rather than server-side. Beyond that, it does not disclose other significant behaviors, but for a read-only list this is acceptable.

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 very short, with no filler and the most important noun phrase first. It is appropriately compact for a simple listing tool, though the extreme brevity leaves semantic gaps.

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?

Given that there is an output schema and read-only annotations, the description does not need to describe return format. However, it omits usage guidance and parametric semantics, so an agent is left to infer when to use this tool and how to interpret the BANK/CREDIT and subtype values.

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%, so the description should compensate for missing parameter explanations disciplines. It only mentions that subtype is filtered locally, but does not explain the meaning or combination of the type and subtype enums, nor how they affect the returned accounts.

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 name 'list_accounts' supplies the verb, and the description's 'Contas e cartões autorizados' identifies the resource as authorized accounts and cards. It is reasonably clear, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling tools like get_account or get_account_balance.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_account or list_transactions. The 'Subtype é filtrado localmente' note hints at behavior, but does not help an agent decide between this and sibling tools.

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