oc_get_account

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive. Description adds valuable context by specifying the returned data includes 'account profile, stats, social links, and metadata' and states authentication requirements ('works without authentication for public data'), which complements the annotations.

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, front-loads the main action, and every sentence adds value. No filler or redundant information.

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 get-by-slug tool with an output schema, the description covers the main inputs and outputs. It could mention error handling or what happens if the slug is invalid, but the presence of an output schema likely handles that. Overall, it is sufficient.

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 description mentions 'by slug' but does not elaborate on the slug parameter beyond what the input schema provides. Context signals indicate 0% schema description coverage, meaning the description should compensate, but it adds no additional meaning to the parameters.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves detailed information about an OpenCollective account by slug. It specifies the exact resource (account/collective) and action (get), distinguishing it from sibling tools like oc_search_accounts which searches, or oc_get_expense which fetches expenses.

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?

Description implies usage by mentioning 'by slug' and 'works without authentication for public data', but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like oc_search_accounts for unknown accounts or oc_get_logged_in_account for the user's own account. No 'when not to use' guidance is provided.

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