get_account_details

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the key behavioral constraint that only explicitly allow-listed customers are valid, and the verb 'Return' reinforces that this is a read operation.

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 one sentence with no filler, and the core constraint ('explicitly allow-listed') is front-loaded. 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?

Given a single required parameter and annotations that establish read-only/idempotent/non-destructive behavior, the description covers the essential precondition and target resource. The return payload is not described, but for a simple single-account lookup with no output schema, this is a minor gap.

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 single parameter's purpose is mostly inferable from its name and the description's 'Google Ads customer' phrasing, and the allow-list constraint adds meaning about valid values. However, with 0% schema coverage, the description still does not specify customer_id format (e.g., hyphens vs. plain numeric ID) or how to obtain an allow-listed ID.

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 ('Return') and names the exact resource ('details for one explicitly allow-listed Google Ads customer'). It clearly distinguishes this tool from list_accounts by scoping it to a single customer and adds the allow-listed constraint.

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 phrase 'explicitly allow-listed' serves as a clear precondition: the tool should only be used for customers that have been pre-approved. It does not explicitly name alternatives like list_accounts, but the single-customer scope provides enough context for selection.

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