Get Account Preferences

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes the safe, non-mutating nature of the tool. The description adds context about the contents of the preferences (selection, custom names) and their association with a connection, but does not disclose any other behavioral traits (e.g., error handling, missing preferences).

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action (Read) and packs in the key details (what preferences, for a connection) without any 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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, simple read operation, no output schema), the description adequately explains what the tool does and what will be returned (the preferences, including selection and custom names). It is complete for an agent to decide and invoke correctly.

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 full description coverage for the single parameter (userInstitutionId), so the description does not need to compensate heavily. The phrase 'for a connection' subtly suggests that the parameter identifies a connection, but this is not explicit or additive beyond the schema 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'Read' and the resource 'stored account preferences', with specific detail about what kind of preferences (selection, custom names) and scope (for a connection). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like save_account_preferences and list_accounts.

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 provides clear context that this is a read-only retrieval of preferences for a connection, which implies its use case relative to save_account_preferences. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria, so it falls short of a 5.

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