get_account

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavior. It clearly indicates a read-only query by stating 'remaining credits,' and 'configured API key' gives a credential context. However, it doesn't explicitly state no side effects, auth requirements, or rate-limit implications; the tool name and semantics imply safety but the description itself doesn't disclose it.

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?

One short sentence with no filler. The front-loaded 'Plan and remaining credits' immediately conveys output; the qualifier 'for the configured API key' adds necessary context.

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, zero-parameter read tool with no output schema. The description sufficiently communicates the tool's purpose and output contents (plan, remaining credits). It could add return format or units, but given the low complexity and no sibling overlap, it's complete for practical selection.

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?

There are no parameters, with 100% schema coverage by default. The description uses the phrase 'configured API key' to clarify which account is referenced (the one already configured), adding a semantic hint beyond the empty schema, though it's not a parameter. Baseline of 4 for zero-param tool applies.

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?

Specific verb 'get' with resource 'account' and description 'Plan and remaining credits for the configured API key' clearly identifies purpose. No sibling tool covers account/API key info, so differentiation is inherent.

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?

Description establishes clear context: use when you need plan/credit status for the configured API key. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but no sibling tool overlaps, so this is adequate.

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