Get Account Summary

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is established. The description adds the rate limit (1 req / 5s) and details the returned fields, which are not present in annotations or schema.

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 two sentences long: the first front-loads the purpose and lists all relevant data categories, the second adds the rate limit. Every word contributes, with no redundancy or filler.

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 zero-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, this description is complete. It explains what the tool returns (account ID, currency, cash/investment metrics, total value) and gives the rate limit. No additional context is needed for an agent to invoke and interpret the 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, so the schema provides no field details. The description compensates by explaining the output contents, even though it doesn't discuss parameters (there are none). Baseline for 0 params is 4, and this description meets it.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('full breakdown of the Trading 212 account'), and enumerates the exact data components. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on positions, orders, or instruments.

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 use when an account-level overview is needed, listing all account metrics. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but given the sibling tools (e.g., get_open_positions, get_pending_orders), the context is clear enough for an agent to select this tool for account-wide summaries.

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