Quady3D get account

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the bar is lower. The description still adds real value by disclosing the authentication side effect ('Authenticates this connection before associating saved requests') and the cost profile ('No generation charge'), both of which are beyond what the annotations state.

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 first sentence is a dense, comma-spliced field list that is hard to scan, and the key operational cue (check before a new task) is buried second. It is not padded, but front-loading the 'read account state' purpose ahead of the field enumeration would improve it.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description's enumeration of returned fields (balance, download access, credit limits, readiness, recovery) appropriately compensates. Combined with the auth and cost notes, an agent has enough to call this correctly as a pre-flight check.

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?

With zero input parameters, there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline for a parameterless tool is a 4. Nothing about the description confuses the (empty) input contract.

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?

Names a specific verb (read) and a concrete resource set — balance, download access, credit limits, workspace readiness, recovery — so the agent knows exactly what payload comes back. It distinguishes itself from siblings like quady3d_create_job or quady3d_get_job by being purely account-state oriented. The only shortfall is the slightly opaque internal field names (local_recovery across-key support) that a caller may not parse without the 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?

The line 'Check ready_for_new_generation before a new task' implies this tool precedes generation, which is useful. But it gives no explicit when-not guidance and never names a sibling alternative or prerequisite, leaving the agent to infer the pre-flight role.

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