get_accounts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does add useful behavioral context by specifying that compact returns id/name/balance/type and full returns all fields. However, it does not explicitly mention that the operation is read-only, nor does it address pagination, limits, or other potential side effects, which is a notable gap given the absence of annotations.

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 extremely concise: two sentences with the main purpose front-loaded, followed by a clear explanation of the parameter behavior. Every word earns its place, with no repetition of schema content.

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 list tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose and return values. It doesn't mention pagination or ordering, but given the tool's simplicity and the richness of sibling information, this is an acceptable level of completeness.

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?

Although the schema already describes the enum with 'compact (default) or full', the description goes beyond by detailing what each verbosity value actually returns (compact: id/name/balance/type; full: all fields). This adds meaningful semantic value for the agent invoking the tool.

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 'Get all accounts.' clearly states the verb (get) and resource (accounts) with scope (all), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_account_balance or get_account_snapshots. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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 description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_account_balance or get_complete_financial_overview. It only explains the verbosity parameter, with no context for selection or exclusions, so it fails to help the agent choose among the many get_* siblings.

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