Get Atera account

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a meaningful behavioral guarantee—'without exposing the API token'—which is not captured by the annotations and gives an agent confidence about security-sensitive behavior.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose and adds a key security qualifier. Every word earns its place, with no repetition of the title or schema.

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 zero-parameter, read-only tool with annotations covering safety, the description is complete enough for correct invocation. No output schema exists, but the resource is clearly identified, and an agent can decide to call this tool without needing further detail.

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 zero parameters, and the schema coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics to document. With no parameters, the baseline of 4 applies, and the description adds no unnecessary parameter-related detail.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('authenticated Atera account context'), and clarifies it does so 'without exposing the API token.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like atera_customers_get or atera_agents_get, which target 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 implies the tool is for retrieving the current authenticated account context, but it does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like atera_health_check or atera_capabilities. There are no exclusions or alternative tool names mentioned, so usage guidance is only implied.

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