get_account

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read. The description adds meaningful context by specifying that the data belongs to the logged-in subscriber, implying an authentication prerequisite. It does not contradict the annotation and provides useful behavioral context beyond it.

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, short sentence with no filler words. The key scope ('logged-in subscriber') is front-loaded, and every word 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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only tool, the description is sufficient to understand what the tool does and when to select it. It does not enumerate the returned account fields, and with no output schema that information is absent, but the core purpose is clear enough for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description has no parameter information to add, but none is needed since the input schema is empty and fully self-explanatory.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and a clear resource ('the logged-in subscriber's account details'), which distinguishes it from siblings like get_usage or get_dashboard. The phrase 'logged-in subscriber' adds useful scope, though it doesn't explicitly name alternative sibling tools.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_dashboard or get_usage. The description implies usage when needing the current subscriber's account details, but it does not state exclusions or context for choosing a sibling tool.

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