Get account

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

The description supplements the readOnlyHint annotation by specifying exactly which properties are returned (number, name, items in inventory, owner) and by framing the tool as a connectivity/credential check, which implies it performs a network call and validates auth. This goes beyond the generic read-only annotation and provides actionable behavioral context.

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 short and front-loaded, with two useful sentences and a third that restates the read-only nature. While 'Read-only' is somewhat redundant with the annotation, it doesn't significantly bloat the description. Overall, it's efficient but not perfectly zero-waste.

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, the description sufficiently covers the return content and the use case. It tells the reader what to expect (account properties) and when to use it, making it contextually complete.

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?

With zero parameters, the schema provides no parameter information. The description adds context about what the tool returns, and since there are no parameters to document, the description appropriately stays silent. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description meets that.

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 'Read FastBound account properties and settings' with a specific verb, resource, and a list of example properties. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_item or get_acquisition by focusing on the account-level resource.

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?

It provides a clear usage context: 'Useful as a connectivity/credential check,' which tells the agent when to invoke this tool. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, but for an account info read, no alternatives are needed. The 'Read-only' note further clarifies it should be used for non-mutating checks.

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