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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations: it names the required X-Mako-Key header, its origin (makometrics.com/portal), and the account-scoping behavior of the key. It doesn't discuss rate limits or failure modes, keeping it from a 5.

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?

Three sentences, all front-loaded: purpose and return fields first, then the ordering instruction, then the authentication requirement. No filler; each sentence carries distinct, necessary information.

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 no-arg read tool with a clear annotation profile, the description covers purpose, return contents, usage timing, and auth requirements well. The absence of an output schema means field-level formatting isn't specified, but the described fields give an agent enough to proceed.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description goes further by documenting the implicit X-Mako-Key header requirement, which is not represented in the schema but is essential to invoking the tool correctly.

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?

States a specific verb ('Show') and resource (the account a key belongs to), then enumerates the exact returned fields: plan, remaining competitor reports, and client workspaces. This distinguishes it from siblings like list_clients or list_plans, which return narrower resources.

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 says 'Call this first in any session that will use the customer tools,' giving a clear when-to-use rule and establishing it as a prerequisite/alternative to the other account-related tools.

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