gcp_list_service_accountsList all service accounts in a Google Cloud project to audit identities and manage IAM permissions. Filter by project to review account details.
Lists all service accounts in a project.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pageToken | No | ||
| projectId | No | GCP project id; defaults to GOOGLE_CLOUD_PROJECT env var |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about pagination (despite a pageToken parameter), required IAM permissions, or result limits. For a list tool, the omission of pagination behavior is a notable 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 filler or redundancy. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly a symptom of under-specification rather than disciplined conciseness.
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 paginated list tool with no output schema, no annotations, and an undocumented pageToken, the description should explain result shape, pagination, and scope. It covers only the barest statement of intent, leaving the agent under-informed to call it correctly.
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 coverage is only 50%: projectId is documented in the schema but pageToken has no description anywhere. The description adds no parameter meaning and does not compensate for the undocumented pageToken, leaving the agent to infer pagination semantics.
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 (Lists) and resource (service accounts) scoped to a project. This clearly distinguishes it from gcp_get_service_account, gcp_create_service_account, and gcp_delete_service_account, though it does not address the near-sibling gcp_list_service_account_keys.
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 on when to use this versus gcp_get_service_account (single lookup) or gcp_list_service_account_keys. No mention of prerequisites or the paginated nature of the call.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.