Get Account

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. 'Get' signals a read-only operation and the description names the returned data. However, it does not disclose authentication requirements, that the data is scoped to the caller's own account, or whether invoking it has any quota/rate implications.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero waste: the verb aresource lead off, and each of the three listed items (tier, usage, limits) is a distinct, meaningful data category. Every word earns its place.

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 zero-parameter read tool with neither annotations nor an output schema, the description covers the essential ground by naming all three data categories returned. Missing auth context and explicit scope (caller's own account) are minor given the tool's simplicity.

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 takes zero parameters, so the schema has nothing to document and the description is not required to explain any. Baseline 4 applies; the description still adds value by telling the agent what the empty call will yield (tier, usage, limits).

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?

Specific verb 'Get' + resource 'your account' + three named data categories (tier, secret usage, limits). The description clearly distinguishes this from all siblings, which strictly target secrets or shares, making the tool's identity 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 when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative tool is named. The context implies this is the account-level status/quota check, likely performed before secret operations, but that usage context is left to inference rather than stated.

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