tokportal_list_accounts

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

Annotations already declare `readOnlyHint: true`, `idempotentHint: true`, and `destructiveHint: false`, so the agent knows it is a safe, read-only query. The description adds nothing about pagination behavior, rate limits, or return format (no output schema). It does not contradict annotations, but it also doesn't add value beyond them.

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, which is appropriately concise. However, it could be slightly more informative (e.g., mention filtering or pagination) without becoming verbose. It avoids wasted words but misses an opportunity to add context.

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 that there are 5 parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It doesn't explain key aspects like pagination handling, what 'delivered' means in this context, or how to use filters effectively. For a listing tool with rich filtering options, the description should be more complete.

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%, and every parameter is well-documented in the schema (e.g., `banned` enum explains values, `country` mentions alias support). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 applies because schema coverage is high and no param info is missing.

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 says 'List delivered accounts,' which is a clear verb+resource combination. It distinguishes the tool as a listing endpoint, but it does not explicitly differentiate it from siblings like `tokportal_get_account` or `tokportal_list_account_bans`, which also deal with accounts. The purpose is clear but not uniquely positioned among siblings.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., `tokportal_get_account` for a single account, `tokportal_list_account_bans` for bans). It also doesn't mention prerequisites, typical use cases, or limitations. The context of filtering via parameters is implied but not explicitly stated as usage advice.

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