get_account_info

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the call is read-only and requires authentication, which is genuinely useful behavioral context. It stops short of saying what the profile contains, whether the response is cached, or what happens on invalid credentials.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose. The second sentence ('Makes a read-only API call') is slightly redundant phrasing but does add the safety signal that annotations would otherwise supply, so it earns its place.

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, no-output-schema read tool this is close to sufficient, but without annotations or an output schema the description should say what the profile response includes (e.g., account ID, tier, name) so an agent knows what it can retrieve.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is no parameter semantics to explain; per the baseline rule this scores 4. The description correctly implies no inputs are needed since it acts on the authenticated principal.

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 verb and resource ('Read the authenticated ElevenLabs account profile'), which is clearly distinguishable from generation and asset tools in the sibling list. It does not, however, distinguish itself from the conceptually adjacent get_subscription, get_capabilities, or get_budget_status.

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 when-to-use guidance is offered beyond the implicit notion that this returns profile data. Several siblings (get_subscription, get_capabilities, get_budget_status) plausibly return overlapping account-level information, and the description gives no criteria for choosing among them.

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