list_accounts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that only accounts the signed-in user can access are returned, which is useful. However, it does not describe pagination, ordering, authentication requirements, or whether the operation is read-only, though that is implied by 'List'.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The primary purpose and key output fields are stated up front, and the entry-point guidance is concise and memorable.

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 list tool with no parameters and an output schema, the description is complete. It explains what the tool returns, who it applies to, and its role in the workflow, which covers the essential context.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the schema covers everything. The description adds value by explicitly stating the output fields and highlighting that the returned account_id is needed for other tools ('Start here to get an account_id'). This goes beyond the baseline for no-parameter tools.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' with a clear resource 'Microsoft Advertising accounts' and scope ('the signed-in user can access'). It also lists the returned fields (id, name, number, customer id), which differentiates it from list tools for other entities like campaigns or ad groups.

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 phrase 'Start here to get an account_id' clearly indicates this is the initial step and provides context for when to use the tool. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, but the entry-point guidance is strong enough for a list tool.

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