get_account

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the behavioral disclosure. It clearly states read-only semantics, the conditional fetch ('if it exists'), and that no signing is required. This covers key behavioral traits for a read operation.

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 extremely concise, consisting of three short statements. It front-loads 'Read-only' (a critical behavioral trait), states the action and condition, and ends with the signing requirement. No wasted 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?

For a simple getter with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers essential aspects: read-only, conditional existence, and no signing. It doesn't specify the return format, but that is often implicit for a fetch operation. The tool is simple enough that the description is adequate.

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 schema already fully describes the 'root' parameter (100% coverage), including that it is a Base58 public key and never a secret. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action 'Fetch' and the resource 'GrokAccount PDA', with the condition 'if it exists'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like create_account, issue_grant, and get_grant by focusing on fetching the account rather than creating or granting.

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 context like 'Read-only' and 'No signing' but does not explicitly contrast this tool with alternatives such as get_grant or check_grant. Usage is implied for reading account data, but no direct guidance on when to prefer this over siblings is given.

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