Get account info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It clearly frames the operation as a read-only retrieval by saying 'Returns...' and identifies the authentication context (the account owning the API key). It does not discuss error handling or rate limits, but for a zero-parameter getter this is sufficient.

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?

A single well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and lists the exact returned fields. Every word adds value and there is no redundancy.

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 simple account-info getter with no parameters and no output schema, the description fully specifies what the agent can expect: email, plan, diamond balance, and renewal date. No additional information is needed to invoke the tool correctly.

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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description correctly indicates that the identity is derived from the API key itself, which is meaningful context beyond the empty schema.

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 ('Returns') and a clear resource ('account that owns this API key'), and enumerates the exact data fields returned. It is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools, which are all about models, templates, generations, and catalog jobs.

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?

The description implies when to use the tool: whenever you need account-level billing or plan information associated with the API key. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name any alternative, though no account-related sibling exists.

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