get_account

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It reveals the precondition of a connected broker but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, what happens if no broker is connected (error vs empty summary), or any side effects. For a simple getter this is a partial disclosure, but it lacks explicit safety assurances.

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, tight sentence that front-loads the core purpose and includes only essential detail (fields and prerequisite). Every word adds value, and it avoids redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 zero-parameter getter with no output schema, the description lists the key return fields and a prerequisite, which is sufficient for an agent to understand what it will retrieve. It does not specify the response structure, but the list of fields is adequate for a simple summary retrieval tool.

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 the schema provides no constraints. The baseline for 0 params is 4. The description correctly adds no parameter information because none exist, and it does not need to compensate for any schema gaps.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource 'active trading account summary' and enumerates the included fields (balance, equity, PnL, margin, available funds). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'list_accounts' which retrieves all accounts, and 'switch_account' which changes the active account, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

It states a clear prerequisite ('Requires a broker connected'), which is useful. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives or specify when to use this tool over others like 'list_accounts' or 'switch_account'. The usage context is implied but not fully spelled out.

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