Get Bundled Notes Account

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description carries a lower bar. It adds valuable behavioral context by disclosing that purchase and authentication tokens are always omitted, which is not apparent from the annotations alone. This helps the agent understand the response shape.

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 sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action ('Return a safe account projection') and adds a crucial caveat ('tokens are always omitted') without being verbose.

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 zero parameters, an output schema present, and clear annotations, the description fully covers the tool's role. It explains the key behavior (safe projection omitting sensitive tokens) and requires no further explanation of return values since the output schema exists.

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, and the schema is complete with no properties. The description has nothing to add regarding parameters, and for a zero-param tool this is fully adequate. The baseline for zero params is 4, and the clean handling earns a 5.

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 clear verb 'Return' and identifies the resource as an 'account projection'. The safety qualifier ('safe', tokens omitted) distinguishes it from sibling tools like bundled_status and bundled_get_bundle, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. The intended context (fetching current user account info without sensitive tokens) is implied but not stated as a comparison against other tools. It would benefit from naming alternatives like bundled_status or noting this is the only user-account tool.

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