Account: Get_account

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing further: no error behavior for an unknown id, no auth/permission requirements, no indication of what the returned account object contains.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though its brevity is also the source of the missing routing and behavior detail rather than an intentional compression of richer content.

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 trivial single-item read whose annotations carry the safety profile and whose lone parameter is fully documented, this is minimally adequate. There is no output schema, so the agent gets no statement of what an account record contains or how failures surface.

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?

With a single parameter at 100% schema description coverage, the schema already documents accountId and even points at List_accounts as the source. The description introduces no format constraints (string vs numeric id) beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 verb and resource ('Retrieve a single Brivo account') and constrains it to one entity via 'by id', which separates it from the sibling List_accounts. It does not, however, distinguish itself from Get_account_summary or the other Account-scoped getters, so the agent must infer the difference.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative in the description itself. The only routing hint lives in the parameter schema ('e.g. from Account: List_accounts'), so the description leaves the choice between Get_account and Get_account_summary entirely to inference.

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