get_api_access

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

Goes beyond the read-only/idempotent annotations by revealing that API keys are masked by default and that setting include_api_key returns a live credential. The detailed secret-handling protocol (use the key, avoid repeating it, show only on request) is exactly the kind of behavioral disclosure that prevents misuse.

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?

Front-loaded with the tool's main purpose and return fields, followed by masking behavior, usage triggers, and secret handling. Slightly redundant by stating 'Read-only' when annotations already carry readOnlyHint, but every remaining sentence serves a distinct function.

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 tool with no output schema, the description enumerates the key response fields (enabled, remaining credits, concurrency limit, max session length, endpoint URL) and the credential behavior. Combined with annotations and schema defaults, an agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly and handle the result safely.

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 description clarifies the effect of include_api_key ('MASKED unless...') and implicitly maps the service options to the two API products, compensating for the schema's 50% description coverage. The service enum values are self-explanatory, so no further elaboration is required.

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 ('Check') and resource (this account's access to Evomi's Scraper API and Scraping Browser) followed by concrete data fields. The specificity separates it from sibling tools like get_account_info or get_proxy_credentials, even though no sibling is named.

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 explicit trigger scenarios: diagnosing a scrape failure due to credits and retrieving the key for EVOMI_SCRAPER_API_KEY. It does not name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the context is unmistakable.

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