provider_get_service_account

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the raw REST endpoint (GET /cloudapi/1.0.0/serviceAccounts/{id}), which is mild corroborating context, but says nothing about error behavior for missing/invalid IDs or what the response contains.

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?

Two short, front-loaded lines with zero filler — the verb-resource statement comes first and the endpoint follows as supporting detail. Slightly redundant since the endpoint path restates what the annotations already show as the title.

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 single-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and rich annotations, this is adequate to invoke correctly. It falls short on what the retrieved account representation looks like (no output schema exists) and on failure modes, so it is minimum-viable rather than complete.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter is documented as a "Service account ID URN (path)", so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only repeats that an id is expected via the endpoint template and adds no format or sourcing guidance beyond it; baseline 3 applies.

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 pairs a specific verb ("Retrieves") with a specific resource ("a specific service account") and even names the underlying endpoint, so the purpose is unambiguous. It does not, however, distinguish it from the sibling list tool provider_query_service_accounts or note that it requires a known ID rather than a search.

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?

Usage is only implied: fetching "a specific" account signals the single-item case versus a collection query, but the description never says when to use this instead of provider_query_service_accounts, nor what to do if the ID is unknown. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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