wc_list_accounts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states the operation is read-only and discloses the return contents (ids + names), which is meaningful behavioral context. It does not mention auth, rate limits, or pagination, but for a zero-parameter list-all tool this is a minor gap.

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 no wasted words. The read-only nature leads, the scope is clear, and the return detail is included efficiently.

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 zero-parameter, read-only list-all tool, the description fully covers what an agent needs: what the tool returns (accounts and profiles with ids and names) and its safety profile. No output schema exists, but the stated return contents are sufficient for this simple call.

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?

The tool has no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds useful information about the return payload (ids + names) even though there is nothing to explain about parameters.

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') and names the exact resources (all WhatConverts agency accounts and their profiles), plus the fields returned (ids + names). It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling creation tools, which are obviously different operations.

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 'Read-only' label plus 'list all' gives clear context for when to call this tool: for a non-mutating listing operation. It does not explicitly enumerate alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling tool names make the contrast obvious.

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