I really don't know what you mean by 'no list'.
Mark I think you missed a lot of context.
IOW's often toledoth (accounts - plural) are not followed by genealogies (lists of descendants), such as you have in Gen. 5, for instance Gen. 2:4, Gen. 6:9, Gen. 11:27, Gen. 25:19, Gen. 37:2. None of those are followed by genealogies. And then sometimes they are.
I'm not arguing there are no genealogies in Genesis, or that a genealogy never follows a toledoth statement.
My point was 1) toledoth are not merely genealogies, but accounts or histories of individuals that
can contain genealogies. 2) toledoth are generally subscripts in Genesis, and not titles, meaning they refer back to what they follow.
For instance, toledoth of the heavens and earth in Gen. 2:4s is a concluding remark of the creation account starting in Gen. 1:1. What follows it is not a creation account of the heavens and earth at all, but rather an account of the garden of Eden, and other events that followed it. That's because Gen. 2:4a is a subscript not a title, therefore it doesn't apply to what follows it. The events that follow are a completely different account. Those are concluded with Adam's toledoth in Gen. 5:1a. Literally
"This [is] the book of the accounts of Adam." Both book (sayfar) and accounts (toledoth) are constructs of the absolute proper name Adam. This is an account that starts in Gen. 2:4b and covers the creation of the Garden, the Fall, Cain and Abel, Cain's genealogy and Seth's birth and ends in Gen. 5:1a.
Then a new account follows starting with Noah's genealogy (linking Adam to Noah) and then a brief account of some events that took place during Noah's life, and God's call for him to build an ark. But I would submit that genealogy is not of the book of Adam's accounts, but rather part of Noah's account. His entire account is followed by the subscript, literally "these [are] the accounts of Noah." Once again, accounts (toledoth - always in the plural) is in the construct for the absolute proper name Noah.
There are some exceptions, such as Ismael's and Esau's accounts which do use toledoth as titles. But those seem to be embedded in Isaac's and Jacob's accounts, which end with their subscripts. For instance after the entire genealogy of Esau, we have the toledoth statement, literally, "these [are] the accounts (toledoth) of Jacob." What follows that is neither a genealogy nor even account account about Jacob, but an account featuring Joseph. IOW's it's a completely different account. Thus, we can conclude this toledoth is actually the subscript signature of Jacob referring back to what was previously written, which included narratives of his life, as well as the embedded genealogies of his brother Esau, whom he reconciled with later in his life. It would seem logical that Esau and he would have exchanged toledoth.
Now just so you know, I didn't come up with this theory on my own. If it's something you're not familiar with, I suggest taking in some articles from some very good men discussing some very interesting archeological discovers about ancient writing structures.
The Tablet Theory of Genesis Authorship
True Origin
Curt Sewell © 1998-2001 by Curt Sewell
CreationWiki: Tablet theory
Did Moses Write Genesis?
Answers in Genesis
by Dr. Terry Mortenson and Bodie Hodge AiG–U.S. June 28, 2011
Who Wrote Genesis? Are the Toledoth Colophons?
Creation Ministries International
by Charles V Taylor, M.A., Ph.D., PGCE, LRAM, FIL, Cert. Theol.
The First Book of Moses and The 'Toledoth' of Genesis
By Damien F. Mackey
Tracing the Hand of Moses in Genesis
By Damien F. Mackeys
Who Wrote Genesis?
Excerpted from Henry M. Morris, the Genesis Record, pp. 25-30
Who Wrote Genesis?
A Third Theory
by Paul A. Hughes
New Discoveries in Babylonia About Genesis (pdf)
By Air Commodor E P. J. Wiseman, C.B.E.