vibekit_account

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. The verb 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and listing the returned data (plan, credits, session usage, limits) adds transparency. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation has no side effects, nor does it mention authentication requirements or potential errors, leaving some behavioral aspects undisclosed.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the tool's purpose (Get account info) followed by a brief list of the specific data returned. Every word contributes value, with no redundancy or padding.

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 tool with no output schema, and the description adequately conveys what the tool returns. It covers the key categories (plan, credits, session usage, limits). However, it could be slightly more complete by clarifying units or the meaning of 'session usage,' but given the low complexity, this is a minor gap.

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 accepts zero parameters, so the schema is fully covered (100% coverage). The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, and the baseline of 4 applies. It adds no extra parameter details, which is appropriate given the absence of 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Get') and the resource ('VibeKit account info'), and it lists specific details included: plan, credits balance, session usage, and limits. This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on apps, deployments, or other specific operations.

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 provides clear context for when this tool is appropriate: when an agent needs to retrieve account-level information such as plan details, credits, or usage limits. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, but the scope is narrow enough that no close alternatives are apparent.

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