get_email_accounts

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It correctly implies a read-only operation by stating 'list' and 'accessible', but it does not explicitly state safety, authentication needs, or potential side effects. The lack of annotations reduces transparency, but the description is not misleading.

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 short (one sentence) and front-loaded with the primary action. However, it includes a redundant '[query]' suffix that adds no value and clutters the text. Slightly detracts from conciseness.

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?

The tool is simple with no parameters, but the description could be more complete by noting if all accounts are returned or if there is pagination. The sibling ambiguity is not addressed. Given the simplicity, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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, so the schema coverage is 100%. The description adds semantic context by stating the returned fields (status and basic configuration), which is helpful but not strictly necessary given no parameters exist. 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 the tool lists email accounts and includes what information is returned (status and basic configuration). However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'list_email_accounts', which has a nearly identical name and likely similar function, reducing clarity.

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 like 'list_email_accounts' or other retrieval tools. The description lacks any context such as prerequisites, limitations, or typical use cases.

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