postgrid_account_summary

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. 'Show' clearly implies a read-only operation, and listing the included fields adds genuine context. It does not explicitly state side effects or connectivity-failure behavior, but for a simple status tool the core behavior is reasonably transparent.

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, front-loaded sentence that immediately states the tool's purpose and the three key content areas. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or repetition.

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, low-complexity status tool, the description is complete. It tells the agent exactly what will be shown, and no output schema or parameter details are necessary to enable correct invocation.

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 has zero parameters, so the description has no parameter semantics to clarify. This matches the baseline of 4 for tools with no parameters; no additional parameter information is needed.

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 names a specific verb ('Show') and a specific resource ('PostGrid account status'), then enumerates exactly what the summary contains: API mode, connectivity, and rate table. This is precise and clearly distinguishes it from the entire sibling set, none of which are account-level status tools.

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 makes the tool's purpose obvious, so an agent can infer that it should be used when account-level status, environment mode, or rate information is needed. However, there is no explicit 'use this when' guidance or discussion of when not to use it, leaving usage to inference.

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