get_share_accounts

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

With no annotations, the description partially carries the behavioral burden: the GET method and 'query list' language imply a read-only operation that returns a list. However, it does not disclose authentication needs, pagination, error behavior, or empty-result semantics, so it is only moderately transparent.

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 compact sentence that includes the purpose and the endpoint. There is no filler or redundancy, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 one-parameter GET tool, the endpoint and query intent are present. However, with no output schema and no parameter or usage elaboration, an agent still lacks details about the return shape and any preconditions. It is minimally adequate but leaves notable gaps.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the single user_id parameter. It only repeats the parameter as {userId} in the endpoint path, without clarifying whose user ID is expected, whether it can be omitted despite being non-required, or the expected format. The path hint provides limited guidance but not enough.

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 clear verb and resource: query the shared account book list. It also names the exact endpoint, which reinforces the purpose. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_account_members, but the resource scope ('shared ledger list') is sufficiently specific.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, and no exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned. Sibling tools such as get_book_bills or get_account_members are not referenced, leaving an agent to infer the appropriate context.

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