gmb_accounts_accounts_admins_list

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

The description adds no behavioral traits beyond what annotations already declare. Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered, but the description merely restates the schema's parent parameter description and HTTP method without providing additional context like pagination or authorization requirements.

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 a single sentence that directly and clearly states the action, with no filler or redundant information. It is front-loaded and perfectly sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 straightforward list operation with comprehensive annotations and full schema coverage, the description is complete enough. It could optionally mention pagination or response format, but these are not critical for the tool's basic understanding, and the openWorldHint and readOnly annotations already imply a read-only list operation.

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%, so all parameters are already documented in the schema. The description does not add any parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, warranting the baseline score of 3.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Lists' and resource 'admins for the specified account', clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like gmb_accounts_locations_admins_list which target location admins. The HTTP method and path provide additional clarity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It simply states the action without mentioning exclusions, prerequisites, or comparison to sibling list tools such as gmb_accounts_locations_admins_list.

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