account_check

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the tool verifies a session, returns balance, and never pays, but does not explain failure behavior for invalid sessions or potential staleness of the returned balance.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The word 'now' is slightly informal, but the core action and exclusion are stated immediately.

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 simple read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description gives enough to understand the broad purpose. It still leaves gaps around parameter format, failure modes, and what exactly 'wallet balance' includes.

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?

There is one required parameter, 'account', with 0% schema description coverage. The description mentions 'account session' but never clarifies whether 'account' is an ID, username, token, or selector, so it does not compensate for the schema gap.

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 names a specific action (verify session) and a concrete result (return wallet balance). The phrase 'never pays' helps distinguish it from payment-oriented siblings like order_pay, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 word 'now' implies immediate use and 'never pays' implies it should not be used for transactions. However, it does not state when to prefer account_refresh or how this differs from other account tools, leaving usage largely implied.

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