Check AIXBT account
meCheck the signed-in AIXBT account, plan, wallet, and usage limits.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes |
meCheck the signed-in AIXBT account, plan, wallet, and usage limits.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Output schema / properties / data / properties / accountAdded value: +{
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "id": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "plan": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "endsAt": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "periodStart": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "renewsAt": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "status": {
+ "enum": [
+ "active",
+ "trialing",
+ "past_due"
+ ],
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "via": {
+ "enum": [
+ "subscription",
+ "holding",
+ "grant"
+ ],
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "name",
+ "via",
+ "status",
+ "periodStart",
+ "renewsAt",
+ "endsAt"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ },
+ "wallet": {
+ "anyOf": [
+ {
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "chain": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "last4": {
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "chain",
+ "last4"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ {
+ "type": "null"
+ }
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "id",
+ "plan",
+ "wallet"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Output schema / properties / data / properties / credentialRemoved value: -{
- "additionalProperties": false,
- "properties": {
- "expiresAt": {
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ]
- },
- "id": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "name": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "type": {
- "type": "string"
- }
- },
- "required": [
- "id",
- "type",
- "expiresAt"
- ],
- "type": "object"
-}Output schema / properties / data / properties / entitlementsRemoved value: -{
- "items": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "type": "array"
-}Output schema / properties / data / properties / history / properties / archiveAccessRemoved value: -{
- "type": "boolean"
-}Output schema / properties / data / properties / history / properties / earliestAvailableAtRemoved value: -{
- "anyOf": [
- {
- "type": "string"
- },
- {
- "type": "null"
- }
- ]
-}Output schema / properties / data / properties / history / properties / enforcedRemoved value: -{
- "type": "boolean"
-}Output schema / properties / data / properties / history / properties / enforcementAtRemoved value: -{
- "type": "string"
-}Output schema / properties / data / properties / history / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "archiveAccess",
- "enforced",
- "lookbackDays",
- "earliestAvailableAt",
- "enforcementAt"
-]New value: +[
+ "lookbackDays"
+]Output schema / properties / data / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "credential",
- "entitlements",
- "rateLimit",
- "history"
-]New value: +[
+ "account",
+ "rateLimit",
+ "history"
+]Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Output schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description's 'Check' verb is fully consistent with that. It adds value by disclosing what the check surfaces (plan, wallet, usage limits), and implicitly signals authentication is required via 'signed-in'. 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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. The verb and resource lead, and the coverage list is compact. Nothing could be trimmed without losing meaning.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values are documented elsewhere. With no parameters and a clear statement of what the tool checks, the description is essentially complete; the only minor gap is that it does not explicitly state authentication is required, though 'signed-in' strongly implies it.
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?
With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the schema has nothing to document, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description's enumeration of what is checked (plan, wallet, usage limits) adds useful context about the operation's scope even though there are no inputs to clarify.
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 ('Check') and a precise resource ('signed-in AIXBT account') and enumerates exactly what is covered (plan, wallet, usage limits). This distinguishes it from all siblings, which are data-query tools (get_intel, list_projects, get_report) — an agent can immediately tell this is the account/self tool.
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?
The 'signed-in' qualifier makes clear this operates on the current authenticated session's account, implying it's for account-level status rather than data retrieval. No explicit alternatives or exclusions are named, but the context is strong enough that confusion with the data-focused siblings is unlikely.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.