list_control_accounts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is established. The description adds useful context by noting the result set is limited to accounts within permissions and by summarizing returned data categories, but it does not go deeper into pagination behavior or conditional sensitive data beyond what the schema's includeApiKey warning already states.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the operation, the scope, and the key return content with no redundant words. It is compact while still being informative.

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 listing tool with no output schema, the description covers the main purpose, permission scope, and notable return fields. With all parameters fully described in the schema, the only minor gap is the lack of explicit statement about default pagination behavior, but that is already present in the schema parameter descriptions.

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 nine parameters are already documented with their meanings. The description does not need to repeat parameter details and adds only general context about the returned account details, which is sufficient given the full schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool lists Control Accounts and scopes results to those within the caller's permissions. It also specifies the key return categories, distinguishing it from sub-resource tools like list_sub_accounts and list_control_account_usages, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 'List all Control Accounts' implies this is the enumeration tool for the Control Accounts resource itself, but it does not explicitly say when to use it instead of get_control_account, list_control_account_usages, or list_sub_accounts. Usage context is implied rather than explicitly guiding selection between siblings.

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