Get my account

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the required scope (user_accounts:read), which is genuine auth context beyond the annotations, though it says nothing about rate limits or error behavior.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, then the pragmatic use case, then the scope requirement. No filler; 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?

For a no-required-param read tool with no output schema, the description supplies the return fields, the scope prerequisite, and the motivating use case. An agent has everything needed to call 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?

The single optional ad_account_id parameter is fully documented in the schema (100% coverage), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description never references it, adding no meaning beyond the structured field — baseline 3.

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 (fetch) and resource (the authenticated user's account), and enumerates exactly what comes back: username, id, account type, profile image, follower counts. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like pinterest_list_followers or pinterest_get_user_analytics, which cover related but different resources.

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 a concrete use case ('The fastest way to verify a token works'), which tells the agent when this cheap read is the right choice. It stops short of naming alternatives or exclusions, so it is clear context without full routing guidance.

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