Get account info

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds real value beyond them: it fixes the scope to the authenticated user and implies an auth dependency (a configured API key), which is behavioral context the annotations do not carry.

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?

Two tight sentences: the return payload is front-loaded, and the usage hint follows. Every clause earns its place with no filler.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must carry the return contract, and it names the four key fields. It could go one step further by noting what happens on an invalid/absent key (error vs. empty result), which is exactly the scenario the usage hint points at.

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?

Zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate — the baseline is 4. The description correctly does not invent parameters.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Return the authenticated SimpleLogin user's info') and enumerates the concrete fields returned (name, email, premium/trial status, alias limit). The enumerated payload distinguishes it from account_get_stats and settings_get without the agent opening either schema.

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?

Gives a clear intended use case — 'a quick check that the configured API key is valid' — which tells the agent when this tool is the right pick. It stops short of naming alternatives or when-not conditions (e.g., vs. account_get_stats or settings_get).

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