list_ledgers

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it states this is a listing (read-only) operation, restricts scope to the 'active Tally company', and discloses that balances are included. It does not mention filtering behavior or potential absence of results, but these are minor for a simple list operation.

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 front-loads the core action ('List all ledger accounts') and then adds essential scope and content details. There is no redundant or filler wording.

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 one optional documented parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it specifies the resource, scope, and return content. It could go slightly further by noting the effect of the nameContains filter, but that is already fully documented in the schema.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but the schema already documents the nameContains parameter, including case sensitivity and its filtering effect. The description does not need to repeat this.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('ledger accounts (chart of accounts)'), and further clarifies the scope to the active Tally company and the inclusion of opening/closing balances. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_ledger (single account), list_groups (different resource), and list_stock_items.

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: to enumerate ledger accounts in the active Tally company. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or conditions under which a different sibling (e.g., get_ledger) would be more appropriate.

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