Switch active account

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses that the tool makes no API call, changes nothing in FastBound, and only affects the server-local session. This is valuable behavioral context because it prevents the agent from assuming the tool performs an external account switch.

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?

Two tightly packed sentences: the first states the core action and scope, the second clarifies side effects and the recommended follow-up. There is no filler, and the most critical information is front-loaded.

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?

With only one parameter, complete schema coverage, and clear behavioral caveats, nothing is missing for an agent to call the tool correctly. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by stating the tool makes no API call; the follow-up instruction covers verification.

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 input schema already documents the single required parameter with 100% coverage, but the description adds practical meaning by saying it accepts an alias or account number and provides examples like 'main' and '10001'. This enriches the schema without redundancy.

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 states a specific action ('Set which FastBound account subsequent tool calls use by default') and clearly identifies the resource and scope. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_accounts and get_account by clarifying it is server-local and does not contact FastBound.

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 says when the effect applies ('only this server session' and 'only calls that do not pass their own account argument') and recommends following with get_account to verify the credentials. This gives clear usage context and even suggests the next step, leaving little ambiguity.

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