Retrieve Account

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It adds useful context beyond annotations by specifying that the account is tied to authentication credentials and that the returned data includes metadata and account-wide settings, giving the agent a clearer picture of the tool's 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?

The description is two short sentences, front-loaded with purpose and endpoint, followed by a key usage note. Every word earns its place with no fluff or redundancy.

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?

This is a simple read-only tool with no parameters, no output schema, and strong annotations. The description fully covers what it does, what it returns, and how the account is identified, making it complete for its complexity level.

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 zero parameters, the schema provides no semantics. The description explicitly states 'No parameters required' and explains that the account is determined by authentication credentials, fully clarifying the parameter situation and going beyond the baseline for param-less tools.

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 ('Retrieve') and identifies the exact resource ('account information including metadata and account-wide settings'). It even includes the HTTP endpoint for traceability. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_account_settings, which focus on settings lists rather than the account object itself.

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 provides clear context: no parameters are required, and the account is determined by authentication credentials. This tells the agent when to use the tool and what to expect. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, so it falls short of a perfect score.

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