Account Info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses that the data is fetched live, which is useful latency context, but it does not mention permissions, rate limits, or whether repeated calls have side effects.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads the resource and lists the key return fields. Every phrase adds information, and there is no redundant or filler text.

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-parameter read tool with an output schema, the description is nearly complete: it names the status fields and notes the live-fetch behavior. It could be slightly richer by stating that the operation is read-only or by noting any authentication expectations.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description appropriately avoids unnecessary parameter discussion and focuses on the returned account status fields.

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 resource and the specific fields returned: expiry, connection limit, and current active connections. It is readily distinguishable from the unrelated sibling tools, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with any alternative.

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?

Usage is implied by the field list: an agent can infer this tool is for checking account status. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no named alternative because no sibling overlaps with this purpose.

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