Get Kommo account

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It adds value by specifying what core data is returned and how to request optional embedded data, giving agents a clear behavioral picture without redundancy.

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 sentences: the first states the core function and return fields, the second explains the optional parameter. Every word earns its place, and the information is front-loaded for quick scanning.

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 simple read-only account getter with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is complete. It states what will be returned, how to request extras, and annotations cover safety. No critical information is missing.

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 already documents the 'with' parameter with 100% coverage, listing valid extras and 'etc.' The description briefly repeats a subset of these values, but doesn't add new semantic meaning beyond the schema. This matches the baseline of 3 for full schema coverage.

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 the specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource 'current Kommo account information' and lists the key data fields (name, id, subdomain, users count). This makes it unambiguous and distinguishes it from sibling tools that target leads, contacts, or other entities.

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 description clearly indicates when to use this tool: to retrieve account-level information. It also explains how to extend the response using the 'with' parameter. While it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives, the resource is unique enough that no exclusions are necessary.

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