list_accounts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the useful note that credentials and config paths are NOT exposed, which is valuable security-relevant behavioral disclosure beyond the annotations. However, it doesn't describe output format or ordering.

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, well-crafted sentence that states what the tool does and adds an important privacy guarantee (no credentials/config paths exposed). Zero waste, appropriate length for a zero-parameter tool.

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 zero-parameter listing tool with readOnly annotations, the description is largely complete. The only gap is that it doesn't describe what the output looks like (list of selector names? format?), but there's no output schema, so the description could have added a bit more about return format. Still, acceptable for the tool's simplicity.

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 zero parameters, so the description needs no parameter documentation. The baseline of 4 for zero-param tools applies given that there's nothing to explain, and the description correctly focuses on what the tool returns rather than parameter details.

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 the tool lists configured GitHub account selectors, which is a specific verb+resource with a clear scope. It distinguishes somewhat from siblings like get_auth_status and list_repositories by clarifying these are account selectors. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from get_auth_status, which closely relates to auth state.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_auth_status. The description mentions listing account selectors but doesn't state when this would be needed versus checking auth status. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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