setup_list_accounts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but "List" conveys read-only semantics and it usefully discloses what is returned (accounts plus granted scopes). It says nothing about auth requirements, whether scopes reflect live grants, or pagination/error behavior.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that states the resource and the returned content with no filler. Every word earns its place.

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-param read tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential return content (accounts and their scopes). Given no annotations exist, a touch more on read-only safety or prerequisites would fully close the gap.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain; the baseline for a no-arg tool applies. The description adds nothing misleading in this dimension.

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?

States a specific verb ("List") and resource ("configured Google accounts and their granted OAuth scopes"), which is unambiguous. It doesn't name or route against siblings like setup_auth or setup_add_account, but the resource itself is distinct enough that an agent can differentiate it.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent would infer this is the way to enumerate existing accounts. There is no explicit when-to-use, no prerequisite (e.g. run setup_auth first), and no mention of how it relates to setup_add_account.

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