Get Current Token

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and the description's 'Read-only account operation' largely restates that. It adds the diagnostic purpose (permission debugging) but doesn't describe what the summary contains or whether the token value itself is exposed, which matters for a token tool.

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?

Three short sentences with no waste; the core action is front-loaded and the diagnostic purpose follows immediately. Every sentence contributes.

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 trivial debug endpoint with no output schema, the description conveys the essential shape of the return ('a summary of the token') and the reason to call it. It stops short of detailing the summary fields, but nothing critical to correct invocation 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single 'account' parameter is documented in the schema as selecting credentials rather than a remote account ID, so the schema carries the semantic load. The description adds nothing about the parameter, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Retrieves a summary of the token used to make the API request'), which is unambiguous and cannot be confused with any sibling tool in the list. An agent knows exactly what will be returned without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly states the intended use case: 'primarily be used to debug permission issues with the API.' That gives clear context for when to reach for this tool, though it names no alternative or exclusion (there is no obvious sibling alternative for token introspection).

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