list_accounts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully warns that results are returned verbatim and include plaintext x_password credential fields, which is important and non-obvious. It could go further by stating read-only status or pagination, but the sensitive-output warning is strong context.

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?

Three concise, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The purpose comes first, then parameter explanations, then a meaningful behavioral warning. Every sentence 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?

Given the low complexity, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the operation, required parameters, and a critical output characteristic. It is nearly complete, though it does not mention potential pagination or whether the full account list is returned at once.

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 fully document the parameters. It does: 'host' is explained as console name, ID, or composite ID with a specific format, and 'site' as name or ID. This adds essential meaning that the bare string schema lacks.

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 ('List') and a specific resource ('local RADIUS user accounts for a site'), which clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like list_users, get_account, and list_radius_profiles. It also clarifies the scoping to local RADIUS accounts per site.

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 purpose implies when to use it — when listing local RADIUS accounts for a site — but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or say when not to use it. The context is clear enough for an agent to infer usage, but there is no direct comparison with related tools.

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