get_account

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read operation ('Get details') but does not explicitly state that it is non-mutating, mention authentication requirements, error behavior (e.g., 404 if not found), or describe what details are returned. It provides basic transparency but not comprehensive context.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It states the action and resource directly, earning its place entirely.

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: one parameter, an output schema, and no nested objects. The description sufficiently conveys what the tool does and identifies the target resource. It could add usage context or mention the output schema explicitly, but given the low complexity, the description is essentially complete for a basic retrieve-by-ID tool.

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 schema has 0% coverage from the description, and the sole parameter account_id is just an integer with no schema description. The description adds the context that the account is a Zube 'account (organization)', which clarifies what the ID represents, but it does not explain where to find this ID, its format, or any scoping nuances. This is partially compensating but not fully.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get details') and clearly identifies the resource ('specific Zube account (organization)'). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_accounts and get_workspace, as it targets a single account rather than listing all or fetching a different entity.

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 phrase 'specific' implies this is for looking up one account by ID, contrasting with list_accounts for enumerating all. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any stated exclusions or prerequisites. Usage is only implied, not spelled out.

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