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

Annotations already convey read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds the scoped output (chart of accounts with code/type/name/status) and its role as a source of bank account UUIDs, but discloses no additional behavioral details like auth requirements or defaults.

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 compact sentences plus a routing line, with the core purpose and output fields front-loaded. The routing line reinforces the intended path without bloat.

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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage and annotations, this is complete: an agent knows what it returns, when to call it, and its place in the posting workflow. No output schema exists, but the key return fields are stated.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents companyId and type. The description doesn't add meaning about either parameter beyond the schema, though it indirectly signals that type=BANK is relevant for posting.

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?

Opens with 'List the company's Xero chart of accounts', a specific verb+resource with the returned fields (code, type, name, status). It also frames its role in the posting flow, so it won't be confused with list_xero_bank_transactions or list_xero_contacts.

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 to use it when mapping a FreedomOS cash-flow category onto a Xero account before posting, or to pick the BANK account UUID for post_xero_transaction. This gives concrete decision context, though it doesn't spell out when not to use related Xero listing tools.

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