Get account info

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It correctly indicates a non-destructive read operation and lists the data returned. However, it does not mention error handling, permissions, or rate limits, which are typical for read tools but not critical.

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 of 10 words, with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and efficiently communicates the tool's functionality.

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 simple read operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context. It could be improved by specifying the response format, but the current level 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 description adds context that the 'address' parameter identifies the account to be read, which goes beyond the schema's 'Base58 Solana address' description. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description provides additional meaningful context.

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 verb 'Read' and the resource 'account', and lists the specific fields returned: owner, lamports, executable flag, and data size. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_balance which only returns balance.

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 implies usage for reading detailed account info, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_balance or execute_action. No usage conditions or exclusions are mentioned.

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