Get TaleSpinner Account
get_accountGet credit balances and subscription status for the connected TaleSpinner account.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
get_accountGet credit balances and subscription status for the connected TaleSpinner account.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds only which fields are returned (credits, subscription status) and reveals nothing extra about auth requirements, freshness, or rate limits.
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 tight sentence with the verb and the returned data front-loaded. No filler, no restating of the title or annotations.
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 zero-parameter read on a fixed account, the description covers everything an agent needs to select and call it, and it partially compensates for the absent output schema by naming the returned fields. It stops short of describing return shape or empty/unauthenticated behavior.
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?
The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there are no arguments whose semantics the description would need to disambiguate.
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 ('Get') and resource ('the connected TaleSpinner account') and names the exact payload (credit balances and subscription status), which cleanly separates it from siblings like get_profile, list_orders, and list_products.
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 description gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and never references an alternative tool. An agent must infer that this is the right call for account/credit/subscription queries rather than being told.
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.