accounts_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It implies a read-only operation ('list'), but does not disclose any potential behavioral traits (e.g., no mention of caching, authentication, or output limitations). Given the simplicity, a 3 is adequate.

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 with 6 words, front-loading the essential information. Every word is necessary and no waste.

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 no parameters, no output schema, and a simple read purpose, the description is complete. It specifies what is returned (alias -> email mapping).

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 zero parameters, and schema coverage is 100% (empty schema). The description adds no extra parameter meaning, which is acceptable as there is nothing to document. The baseline for 0 params is 4.

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 'List connected Google accounts (alias -> email)' using a specific verb and resource, and the tool name 'accounts_list' matches this purpose. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools which are all calendar and Gmail related.

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 explicit use cases or alternatives are given, but the context of sibling tools (calendars, gmail) makes it obvious that this tool is for account listing. A slightly higher score would require explicit when-not guidance, which is unnecessary here.

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