Get Account

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond this: it discloses the exact response shape, indicates the data reflects the 'currently authenticated' user, and documents error cases such as invalid/expired API keys and suspended accounts.

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 well-organized with an opening summary, usage context, a concrete return shape, examples, and error handling. Each section adds value, especially since there is no output schema, and the structure is front-loaded with the most important information.

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 low complexity, zero parameters, and rich annotations, the description is complete. It compensates for the missing output schema by documenting all returned fields and provides enough guidance on authentication, examples, and error behavior for an agent to invoke and interpret this tool 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?

This tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. There are no parameter semantics to explain, and the description correctly focuses on the returned profile and usage context instead of inventing unnecessary parameter details.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Returns the profile of the currently authenticated Monei user.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like monei_get_wallet or monei_get_transaction_history, which cover different resources.

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 guidance on when to use the tool: at the start of a session to identify the logged-in user, confirm identity, or check verification status. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the context is strong enough that an agent can select it appropriately.

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