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

readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile; the description adds the concrete return shape (which fields come back) and the underlying endpoint POST /v2/get_user_details. No auth or rate-limit context, but for a zero-param read that's minor.

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?

Two tight sentences: what comes back first, then the usage cue and endpoint. Every clause carries information, though the raw endpoint string is of marginal value to an agent.

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 exists, but the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields. With no parameters and annotations covering read-only safety, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret it; only error/empty-case behavior is unstated.

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 there is nothing to disambiguate and the description correctly spends no words on arguments. Baseline 4 applies.

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+resource: retrieves the connected Tookan account's admin user details, enumerating the fields (user_id, email, name, company name, address). The qualifier 'connected ... (admin user)' distinguishes it clearly from siblings like tookan_get_agent, tookan_get_customer, and tookan_list_agents.

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?

'Good first call' gives explicit situational guidance for when to reach for this tool, useful since it takes no parameters. It stops short of naming alternatives or exclusions (e.g., use tookan_get_agent for other users), so it doesn't reach a 5.

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