Get account

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds a useful behavioral disclosure beyond annotations: access token values are redacted and only labels/timestamps are returned. This gives the agent accurate expectations about sensitive data handling.

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?

Two short sentences convey scope, contents, and redaction behavior with no filler. The most important field list is front-loaded, and the security note 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 parameterless read-only account lookup with an output schema and rich annotations, the description covers what the tool returns and how sensitive tokens appear. No critical information is missing for 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 and schema coverage is effectively 100%, so there is no parameter ambiguity to resolve. Per the baseline for parameterless tools, no further description 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 enumerates the resource ("configured credentials") and the exact data returned (identity, role, tier, limits, usage), making the purpose clear. It lacks an explicit verb like "retrieve" and does not explicitly contrast with siblings, so it falls just short of a 5.

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 intended use is implied: an agent needing account/credential details for the current configuration would call this. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison with alternatives such as get_server_info, so the guidance is only implicit.

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