get_account_summary

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

With no annotations, the description partially discloses behavior by listing returned fields. However, it does not mention read-only nature, authentication needs, or side effects. The 'get' in the name implies read-only but is not explicit.

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 concise, using two lines to summarize output and the argument. It is front-loaded with the key info. Minor improvement could be a more structured format.

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?

An output schema exists, so return value details are not needed. However, given the context (siblings like check_auth_status, get_profile_details), the description does not help the agent choose this tool over others. It lacks when to use it context.

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 one optional parameter with 0% description coverage. The description adds minimal information: 'Account name (optional, uses default).' It does not explain what 'account' refers to or what the default value is, adding little value beyond the schema.

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 returns member info including name, AAdvantage number, mile balance, status, etc. It uses specific verb+resource and lists fields, but does not differentiate from siblings like get_profile_details or get_mile_activity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It only notes the account parameter is optional and uses a default, but does not explain prerequisites or when this summary is appropriate over other tools.

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