apple_notes_list_accounts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the description's 'Read-only' prefix is largely redundant. It does add value by naming the returned fields (account IDs and names), but says nothing about pagination behavior or ordering, which matters given limit/offset.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the safety qualifier first and zero filler. It is efficient, though so terse that it borders on under-specification rather than tightness.

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 no-required-param enumeration tool with no output schema, knowing it returns account IDs and names is the core need, and that is covered. The missing piece is pagination guidance for the two convenience parameters, which leaves the definition adequate but incomplete.

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 carries full responsibility for the two parameters, yet it never mentions limit or offset, their defaults, or their maximums. An agent must read the raw schema to learn that results are paginated at all.

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?

States a specific verb ('list') and a specific resource ('Notes account IDs and names'), which distinguishes it from siblings like apple_notes_list (notes) and apple_notes_list_folders (folders). It does not explicitly name those alternatives, but the resource scope alone is enough to separate it.

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 indication of when to call this versus apple_notes_list_folders, apple_notes_list, or the parallel account-listing tools in other apps. It also omits any prerequisite context, such as whether account discovery must precede folder or note operations.

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