Get Account

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that the tool is 'Free and read-only' and 'requires authentication,' which provides some additional context beyond the annotations. However, it does not elaborate on other behavioral aspects like rate limits or data freshness.

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 three sentences long, efficient, and front-loaded. It lists return fields first, then adds context about cost and authentication, and ends with a practical usage tip. No wasted words.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description comprehensively lists all return fields (email, verification status, plan, credit balance, member-since date, API keys). It also covers usage context and auth requirements, making it fully informative for an agent.

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 no parameters, so the description cannot add parameter-specific details. According to the rubric, zero parameters yields a baseline of 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics.

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 explicitly states that the tool returns 'BizVerify account summary' and enumerates the specific fields (email, verification status, plan, credit balance, member-since date, API keys). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like verify_business or get_config, which serve different purposes.

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 advises using the tool to 'check your remaining credit balance before running paid verifications,' providing clear context for when to invoke it. It also notes that it is 'Free and read-only,' implicitly guiding against using it for paid or write operations.

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