getMemberAccountType

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

With no annotations provided, the description covers behavioral aspects well: it explains return types (SPOT, CONTRACT, etc.), filtering logic, and account type combinations for UTA/UMA/Classic accounts. It does not mention rate limits or authentication details but is largely transparent.

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 well-structured with sections and bullet points, providing detailed information without being unnecessarily verbose. The first sentence is a clear summary, and subsequent sections add depth efficiently.

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 absence of an output schema, the description effectively explains return values and account type combinations. It covers filtering rules and usage notes, making it complete for a read-only tool with one parameter.

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 only parameter 'memberIds' has 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not clarify the expected format (e.g., comma-separated, JSON array). It only says 'specified member IDs', which adds minimal value beyond the parameter name.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves account type information for specified member IDs, using active verbs like 'Get' and 'query'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on account type details.

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 mentions using master or sub-account API keys and includes filtering rules, but does not explicitly specify when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusion criteria.

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