get_account_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only operation by saying 'confirm' and 'returns', but does not explicitly state that no data is modified or that it is safe to call multiple times. However, for a simple info retrieval tool, this level of transparency is adequate.

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 paragraph that efficiently packs purpose, return values, usage instructions, and error handling. It could be slightly shorter, but every sentence serves a clear 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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and zero parameters, the description fully covers what an agent needs: what the tool does, what it returns, when to call it, and how to handle results. No important gaps remain.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed. Per guidelines, 0 parameters yields a baseline of 4, and the description does not detract from that.

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 tool's purpose: to confirm the FindMe account and Google Drive connection. It lists the specific pieces of information returned (email, plan tier, event count, Google email) and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_event or get_usage by focusing on session-level context rather than individual resources.

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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'ALWAYS call this once at the start of any conversation that involves listing events, uploading photos, importing from Drive, or any account-scoped action'. It also advises surfacing the result to the photographer and gives instructions for handling mismatched emails or missing Drive connections.

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