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

Beyond the annotations, it discloses important connection behavior: the tool requires a connected OneQAZ account, calling it without one prompts the AI app to connect, free use needs no API key, and Pro users can use their key. This is exactly the kind of auth and precondition context the annotations do not supply.

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 and organized into Purpose, Triggers, When to call, Output, and Output nature. It is efficient overall, though the Output section duplicates detail already available in the output schema and 'Output nature' is somewhat vague.

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?

Given the zero-parameter schema, existing output schema, and read-only annotations, the description is complete enough for correct invocation. It covers purpose, triggers, preconditions, and output shape without leaving material gaps.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The empty input schema is fully consistent with the description, and there are no parameter semantics that need further explanation.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: it shows which OneQAZ account or API key the connection uses, plus plan and rate limits. It also clearly distinguishes this from other tools by noting that all other tools work without an account, so an agent can identify it as the account-status 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?

It provides explicit triggers such as 'is my OneQAZ account connected?' and 'what plan am I on?', and states 'When to call: only when the user asks about their own account or limits.' It also clarifies that other tools do not require an account, which helps route the agent away from this tool for non-account queries.

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