queryaccounttype

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits, but it gives no information about the tool's behavior—whether it's a read-only query, if it requires authentication, its rate limits, error conditions, or what it returns. The description is entirely silent on these critical aspects, leaving the agent with no understanding of how the tool operates.

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?

While the description is extremely concise with just one word, this is due to under-specification rather than effective brevity. It lacks any structure or front-loading of key information, failing to convey purpose or usage in a meaningful way. Every sentence should earn its place, but here the single 'sentence' provides no value.

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 tool's complexity (a query with one parameter) and the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain what the tool does, when to use it, behavioral traits, or return values, leaving the agent unable to understand or correctly invoke the tool in context with its many siblings.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for its single parameter 'sec_user_id', providing an example value. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters, such as explaining what 'sec_user_id' represents or its relationship to querying account types. Since schema coverage is high, the baseline score of 3 applies, as the schema adequately documents the parameter without help from the description.

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool, such as its intended context, prerequisites, or alternatives. With no usage instructions, an agent cannot determine if this is the appropriate tool for a given scenario compared to the many sibling tools listed, like 'profile', 'info', or 'detail'.

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