get_accountRetrieve detailed account information—dollar balances, type, reconciliation time, and debt metadata—for a specific account ID to support financial tracking and analysis.
Get account dollar balances, type, reconciliation time and debt metadata. For comparisons use list_accounts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| budgetId | No | ||
| accountId | Yes | Account ID |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v6.1.0Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"Input schema / properties / budgetId / descriptionRemoved value: -"Budget ID (uses default if not provided)"Output schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"v5.4.0Output schema / properties / result / descriptionRemoved value: -"Structured result returned by Get Account."v5.1.1Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "result": {
+ "description": "Structured result returned by Get Account."
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "result"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}v2.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered and the description needn't restate it. The description adds the shape of the payload (balances, type, reconciliation time, debt metadata), which is a modest but real value-add; it does not cover auth requirements, error behavior, or whether the account must be on-budget.
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 with zero filler, and the core purpose is front-loaded ahead of the sibling routing hint. Every clause 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?
The tool is simple, annotations are rich, and an output schema exists, so return values do not need explaining — the description is largely adequate. However it never clarifies the optional budgetId, which for a budget-scoped read tool is the one thing an agent is most likely to get wrong.
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 description coverage is only 50%: accountId is described tautologically ('Account ID') and budgetId carries no description at all, so ambiguity remains about whether budgetId is optional and what it defaults to. The description says nothing about either parameter to compensate for that gap, leaving the burden entirely on an under-documented schema.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Get account') and enumerates the concrete data it returns (dollar balances, type, reconciliation time, debt metadata), which tells an agent exactly what it will learn. It also names the sibling it is not ('For comparisons use list_accounts'), so it is distinguishable without opening either schema.
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?
Explicitly routes the agent to list_accounts when it needs comparisons, giving a concrete condition that selects the alternative. It stops short of stating other when-not cases (e.g. fetching many accounts, or when only balances are needed), so it is clear context but not a full decision tree.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.