Get account

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

The description adds useful behavioral context by naming the returned fields and token health details, and 'get' implies a read-only operation. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it does not disclose behavior for invalid/missing account IDs or whether only currently connected accounts are returned.

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 dense sentence that front-loads the tool's target and lists the key returned fields with no filler. Every part contributes meaning.

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 one-parameter getter, the field list provides a reasonable sketch, but the absence of annotations, output schema, and any usage or error context leaves an agent guessing about where accountId originates and what happens on failure. It is minimally adequate but not complete.

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 coverage is 0% and the description never mentions accountId, so the parameter's meaning is left entirely to its name. It would benefit from a note that accountId is the ID of a connected account, ideally pointing to list_accounts as its source.

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 identifies a single connected account and enumerates its contents (profile, follower count, token health), distinguishing it from list_accounts and get_account_analytics. It uses a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb, but the title 'Get account' supplies the action.

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 like list_accounts or get_account_analytics. It also fails to mention that the accountId should come from list_accounts or connect_account, leaving selection up to inference.

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