zetrix_get_account_base

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions the tool is a read operation ('Get') and specifies content exclusions, but lacks critical behavioral details: whether it requires authentication, rate limits, error conditions, or response format. For a read tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose and key limitation. Every word earns its place with zero redundancy or fluff.

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 simple read tool with 1 parameter (fully documented in schema) but no annotations or output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It clarifies scope vs. siblings, but lacks behavioral context (auth, errors, response format) that would be needed for robust agent usage.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% (the 'address' parameter is fully documented in the schema), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema already provides, but doesn't need to compensate for gaps.

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 clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('basic account information') with a specific scope limitation ('without assets and metadata'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'zetrix_get_account' (likely full account info) and 'zetrix_get_account_assets'/'zetrix_get_account_metadata' (specific components), but doesn't explicitly name these alternatives.

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 usage context by specifying what's excluded ('without assets and metadata'), suggesting this tool is for lightweight account overviews. However, it doesn't provide explicit when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or direct comparisons with alternatives like 'zetrix_get_account' or 'zetrix_get_balance'.

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