Get Account Setup Configuration

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

Despite annotations indicating read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, the description adds critical context: null values mean unsaved fields, locked fields must not be changed, capabilities determine integration options, and country labels are Italian. This goes beyond what annotations provide, enhancing transparency.

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 structured with a clear purpose statement, a sequence note, and a bulleted list of key behaviors. Every sentence and bullet adds value, no redundancy or fluff, making it appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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, the description thoroughly explains the return payload's structure and semantics (configurations, field_locks, capabilities, lookups, allowed_integration_toggles). It also tells the agent how to interpret and use the data, leaving no important context missing.

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 already fully describes the only parameter (onboarding_token) with its source and expiration. The description does not add additional meaning to the parameter, so the baseline score of 3 applies since schema coverage is 100%.

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 it retrieves the full account setup payload including current field values, lookup tables, capabilities, and integration state. It uses a specific verb and resource, and the phrase 'step 4 of 5 in the onboarding sequence' distinguishes it from related onboarding tools like pop_onboarding_get_status and pop_onboarding_save_account_setup.

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 explicitly says 'This is step 4 of 5 in the onboarding sequence' and 'Call this before save_account_setup', providing clear when-to-use guidance. It also lists what to understand from the response, making the intended usage obvious.

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