List accounts

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds context beyond those: 'Costs no network call' and the important fact that revenue, customers, and affiliates are entirely separate per cart. This helps the agent reason about multi-cart semantics.

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 tight, front-loads the core purpose, and every sentence carries distinct operational value: what it lists, how to use results, performance, and data isolation. There is no redundant filler.

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-input, low-complexity list tool, the description fully covers when to call it, what it returns at a practical level, and why that matters. The lack of an output schema is compensated by the clear 'returned name' wording and the explanation of cart separation.

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 and schema coverage is 100%, so there is nothing for the description to add about input parameters. It productively clarifies how the output should be used as the `account` argument elsewhere.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'List every ThriveCart account configured on this server.' It is clearly distinct from sibling tools, which operate on products, customers, transactions, and affiliates rather than on server-level accounts.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this first whenever a request could plausibly mean more than one cart.' It also tells the agent how to use the result: pass a returned name as the `account` argument on other tools.

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