Show the LinkPilot account

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real context beyond that: the data is scoped to the configured API key and includes usage/rate budget, which tells the agent this is a credentials-scoped introspection call rather than a general query.

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 tight sentences with zero filler, and the payload contents are front-loaded before the usage guidance. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description enumerates the return fields an agent needs (workspace, plan, limits, usage, remaining rate budget), which is sufficient for a zero-parameter read tool. Nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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 takes zero parameters, so the description has no parameter semantics to explain; baseline for a 0-param tool is 4. It correctly implies no arguments are needed by tying the result to the already-configured API key.

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?

Specific verb ('Show') plus an enumerated resource set (workspace, plan, limits, usage, remaining rate budget) tied to the configured API key. None of the siblings (link/secret CRUD) overlap with this account-introspection purpose, so an agent can select it unambiguously.

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 two concrete when-to-use conditions: checking a limit before a bulk operation and confirming which account is connected. It stops short of naming alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling set is so different that routing is clear.

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