account_summary

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

No annotations provided. The description only lists output fields but does not disclose behavioral traits like whether the operation is read-only, requires authentication, or has any side effects. For a tool with no annotations, this is insufficient.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, no unnecessary words. Extremely concise and efficient.

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?

Given no parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimal. It lists three fields but does not clarify if these are all returned fields or just examples, nor does it describe the return format. Adequate for a simple tool but leaves some ambiguity.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. According to guidelines, baseline is 4. The description does not need to add parameter details because none exist.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns an account summary with specific fields (available funds, net liquidation, buying power). The verb 'summary' implies retrieval, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'portfolio' or 'positions' that provide different granularity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'portfolio' or 'positions'. Missing context on whether this is a high-level snapshot or if it includes additional details, and no exclusions for specific scenarios.

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