mail_list_accounts

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

The description indicates a read-only listing operation without destructive side effects. While there are no annotations to confirm, the description itself provides enough transparency. It could mention non-destructiveness explicitly, but the context is sufficient.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource, containing no unnecessary words. Every word serves a purpose.

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 tool with zero parameters and a straightforward purpose, the description is complete. It clearly specifies what is listed and what information is returned, with no obvious 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?

There are no parameters in the schema, and the description adequately compensates by stating what the tool returns (name + email addresses). Since schema coverage is 100% (no params to describe), the description adds value by clarifying output content.

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 clearly states the verb 'List', the resource 'Mail.app accounts', and specifies the output includes 'name + email addresses'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like mail_list_mailboxes or mail_list_messages, which operate on different entities.

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 implies usage when a user needs to see configured accounts, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings. However, the sibling tools cover different domains (calendars, contacts, mail messages, notes, reminders), so the intended use is reasonably clear.

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