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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is established. The description adds significant behavioral context: returns full shop configuration, lists included fields, and explains the invoice prerequisite check. No contradiction.

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 front-loaded with the main purpose in the first sentence. Every subsequent sentence adds value (list of fields, usage guidance). No wasted words. Length is appropriate for the complexity.

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?

No output schema, so description compensates by detailing return fields and usage context. For a zero-parameter read tool with annotations, the description provides sufficient information for correct invocation and decision-making.

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?

Input schema has 0 parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. The description need not add parameter details. Baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and no additional info is required.

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 action (retrieve), the resource (authenticated shop account settings as JSON), and provides a detailed list of what is included. It distinguishes from siblings like account_list by specifying 'settings of the authenticated shop account' rather than a list of accounts.

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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'verify invoice prerequisites before creating orders' and lists specific fields to check. Also advises to prompt user to fill missing fields via account_edit. Does not mention negative cases or alternatives, but the context is clear.

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