account_info

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes key traits: it's free to call, no API key is required, and it serves as an entry point for platform onboarding. However, it lacks details on rate limits, error handling, or response format, which would be helpful for a tool with no output schema.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage guidance and platform context. It's efficient but includes some promotional content ('20 tools across 6 modules') that, while informative, slightly reduces conciseness. Most sentences directly support tool understanding.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description does a good job covering purpose, usage, and behavioral aspects. It explains the parameter's effect and onboarding process. However, it doesn't detail the return structure or potential errors, leaving some gaps in completeness for an agent invoking the tool.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the optional parameter's purpose ('If provided, your current balance is returned') and providing context on account creation ('your Hedera account ID becomes your API key automatically'), which enhances understanding beyond the schema's technical details.

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 tool's purpose with specific verbs ('Get platform wallet address, pricing for all 20 tools in HBAR and USD, and your current balance') and distinguishes it from siblings by focusing on account information rather than contract analysis, governance, HCS operations, identity checks, or token functions. It provides a comprehensive overview of what data is retrieved.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool ('Use this tool first to discover how to fund an account and start using the platform') and provides clear alternatives for account creation ('To create an account automatically, simply send HBAR to the platform wallet'). It also mentions it's 'FREE to call — no API key required,' which helps differentiate it from tools that might require authentication.

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