Metis — Which Account

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses an authoritative precondition for risky operations ('call this before... and follow it'), but does not explain what happens if skipped, whether it reads local configuration, or error behavior. Output return shape is covered by the output schema.

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 sentences with purpose front-loaded and usage directive second. No wasted wording; appropriately sized for a preflight lookup tool.

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 one-parameter lookup with an output schema, the description gives enough purpose and timing context to invoke it. The remaining gap is path semantics, which is minor but noticeable because schema coverage is absent.

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 single path parameter has 0% schema description coverage. The description implies it is a folder path, but does not specify absolute versus relative paths, whether file paths are accepted, or what happens for unknown or untracked folders.

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?

States a specific lookup: which project a folder belongs to and which account it must use for GitHub, Netlify and Supabase. This distinguishes it from generic account tools like list_accounts, though the name 'which_account' underplays the project-mapping purpose.

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?

Gives a clear timing rule: call before any push, publish, release or database change, and follow the result. It does not name alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, but the pre-operation context is explicit.

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