fb_list_ad_accounts

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the core function, omitting details like token requirements, potential empty responses, or any operational constraints.

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, clear sentence with no redundant information. It is concise and front-loaded.

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 there is no output schema, the description should explain the return format or pagination. It does not, leaving a gap. However, the tool is simple with one parameter, so minimalism is somewhat acceptable.

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?

The single parameter 'fields' has complete schema coverage (100%). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'List Meta Ad Accounts accessible by the token.' uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Meta Ad Accounts'), clearly stating the tool's function. It distinguishes effectively from sibling tools like fb_list_campaigns and fb_list_pages.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of scenarios or exclusions, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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