Get Account

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint: true, so the description's 'Get details' is consistent and adds no new safety information. It does not describe return format, error behavior, or any side effects beyond the read-only nature, which is already covered by the annotation.

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 concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. Every word earns its place, with no wasted or redundant phrasing.

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 the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema, read-only annotations), the description is complete enough. It tells the agent exactly what the tool does and how to use it, and the structured fields handle the rest.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with the parameter description 'The Canvas account ID', so the description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema. This is the baseline for high schema coverage, and no extra semantic detail is provided.

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', names the resource 'Canvas account', and includes the scope 'by ID', making it clear that this retrieves a single account rather than listing accounts. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_accounts or list_sub_accounts by implying a specific lookup.

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 that this tool is for retrieving a specific account by ID, which implicitly indicates when to use it instead of listing tools. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or give when-not-to-use guidance, so it falls slightly short of a 5.

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