account_overview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds only that the summary is period-scoped; it says nothing about return format, freshness of the counts, or auth needs, but with annotations present the bar is lower.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the trailing 'within the chosen period' is vague enough that it does less work than its word count suggests.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and annotations cover the safety profile. For a one-parameter read-only overview the description is largely sufficient; the only real gap is not clarifying what the 'chosen period' parameter actually controls.

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 schema has 0% description coverage on its single parameter (expiry_days, default 30, range 0-3650). The phrase 'within the chosen period' hints that the parameter controls a time window, but it never names expiry_days, its units, or the default, so it only partially compensates for the schema gap.

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?

Names a specific verb (Summarize) and the exact resources it aggregates: domain counts, statuses, and expiring domains. An agent can tell this is an aggregate/overview tool rather than a per-item lister like list_domains or get_domain, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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 only usage signal is 'within the chosen period', which relates to the parameter rather than telling the agent when this tool is preferable to list_domains. No prerequisites, exclusions, or alternative-selection guidance is provided.

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