hebbrix_account_status

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

Despite no annotations, the description transparently describes what the tool provides and the intended agent behavior in auto-provisioned mode. Does not mention authentication or non-destructive nature, but the behavioral guidance is clear.

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 concise sentences: first defines purpose, second provides actionable guidance. No wasted words, well front-loaded.

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 no parameters and presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool returns and the appropriate action. Complete for the tool's simplicity.

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?

No parameters exist, so baseline is 4. Description adds meaning by specifying the output content (tier, usage, limits, expiry) beyond the schema's property names.

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?

Clearly states the tool returns account details (tier, usage, limits, expiry) for the agent's account, distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle memory or data operations.

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?

Explicitly instructs the agent to relay the claim command to the human when usage status is 'warning' or worse, providing clear context for using the tool and acting on results. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' but is still strong.

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