list_accounts

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, which the description does not contradict. The description adds useful behavior beyond annotations: it explains the live connection check when checkConnections:true, noting it is slower. This enriches the agent's understanding of side effects and performance.

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 densely informative with zero filler. It front-loads the core action, then provides the critical slug usage rule and the optional parameter effect, all in a compact block. 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 read-only list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: what it lists, the connection status and index freshness details, the slug convention for targeting accounts, and the trade-off of checkConnections. Nothing essential is missing.

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 100% for the single parameter checkConnections, which the schema already documents as 'Verify IMAP/SMTP connectivity for every account (adds a real connection attempt per account).' The description adds the words 'live' and 'slower', providing slight nuance, but the schema already carries the essential semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('every configured Proton address'), and explains the purpose: to see which accounts the server manages and each account's slug. It distinguishes from any sibling by being the only tool that enumerates accounts with connection status and index freshness.

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?

It provides clear context for when to use it ('Use to see which accounts this server is managing') and explains how to leverage the slug for targeting in other tools. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but given the unique role of listing accounts, the guidance is adequate.

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