account_info

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safe read-only nature is covered. The description adds useful specificity about what exactly is read—account plan and unified/per-type credit balances—but does not describe response format, potential staleness, or access requirements.

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 that wastes no words. It leads with the action, names the resource, and includes the most decision-relevant detail in a compact phrase.

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?

This is a simple, zero-parameter read operation. The description covers the account plan and the full credit-usage picture, including unified and per-type balances, which is sufficient context for an agent to invoke the tool and interpret its result.

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 tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so there is no parameter documentation burden for the description to carry. Baseline 4 is appropriate because nothing is missing and no parameter-level explanation could add value.

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 states a specific verb ('Read'), a precise resource ('Hunter v2 account plan'), and the exact data returned ('current credit usage', 'remaining unified or per-type balances'). This clearly distinguishes it from all sibling tools, which are about leads, searches, enrichment, and verification.

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 implies when to use the tool: whenever account-level credit or plan information is needed. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use alternatives or mention any related tools, though the sibling set makes such confusion unlikely.

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