get_loyalty_accounts

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, but the description adds valuable behavioral details: it returns a formatted list including points balance, tier status, estimated cash value, recent changes, expiration dates, and instructions to connect if no accounts. No contradictions.

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 concise with three short paragraphs. Every sentence adds value: purpose, returned fields, auth requirement, and return format. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given the low complexity (0 parameters, read-only), the description fully covers the tool's purpose, behavior, and prerequisites. The presence of an output schema means return values need not be elaborated further.

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 description cannot add meaning beyond the schema. Per guidelines, baseline is 4. The description appropriately outlines what the tool returns without needing parameter details.

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 'Get the user's hotel and airline loyalty accounts', specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_payment_methods and get_free_night_credits by focusing on loyalty accounts.

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 notes that a Gondola account (API key) is required, providing context. It does not explicitly exclude scenarios or mention alternatives, but the requirement gives a clear prerequisite.

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