List subaccounts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description contributes nothing beyond that: no pagination behavior, no mention of default limit of 10 or the 100 maximum, no ordering guarantee, and no note on how cursors interact with the created filter.

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?

It is short, but the second sentence is a redundant paraphrase of the first and neither is front-loaded with actionable information. Brevity here comes from under-specification rather than from tight writing.

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 a nested date-range filter and no output schema, the description should at minimum clarify pagination strategy and what a returned subaccount contains. It leaves an agent to infer everything from the schema alone.

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 the schema already explains the limit cap, the created date-range filter syntax, and both cursor semantics. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, which places it at the baseline for high-coverage schemas rather than above it.

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 restates the tool name twice ('List subaccounts. / List your subaccounts.') without adding scope, filtering behavior, or any differentiator from sibling tools like get_subaccount or list_customers. An agent learns only that it returns a list of subaccounts, which the name already conveys.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance whatsoever — no mention of when to call this versus get_subaccount for a single record, or list_customers for the related resource. It does not state prerequisites such as account or API-key scope, nor does it mention what the results represent.

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