boond_accounts_get

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It says 'Get an account by ID' which implies a read-only operation, but it does not mention side effects, error behavior, authorization requirements, or return format. This is minimal and leaves too much to inference.

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 and front-loaded, containing six words with no fluff. It states the core action and scope immediately, which is ideal for quick agent parsing.

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 get-by-ID tool with one parameter, this is minimally adequate. However, there is no output schema or description of the return value, and the description does not address potential errors (e.g., not found) or response shape. Given the lack of annotations, a bit more context would improve completeness.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented 'id' parameter. It adds 'by ID', which is nearly redundant with the schema property name and the tool name. It does not clarify what type of ID, whether it is a path or query parameter, or any format constraints beyond the schema's minLength.

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 specific verb and resource ('Get an account') and clarifies the scope ('by ID'), which distinguishes it from the sibling search tools like boond_accounts_search. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from boond_banking_accounts_get, and the word 'account' could be ambiguous in this context.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as boond_accounts_search for listing or boond_accounts_get when you have an ID. The description simply states the action without providing contextual selection criteria or exclusions.

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