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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds real behavioral detail: return format is Markdown, suffix and index inputs are normalized, and the /api/banks-connect, /api/ai-connect, /api/pay-connect paths return a compact operation index rather than raw spec. It stops short of describing pagination or size limits, which is minor.

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 core action is front-loaded in sentence one, followed by input-normalization details, special-case paths, and routing guidance in a tight sequence. Five sentences, each carrying distinct information with no repetition.

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 single-parameter read tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description closes all remaining gaps: accepted input variants, special-cased API reference paths, and sibling routing. An agent can invoke it correctly without further inference.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden and does so: it names the parameter's accepted forms (docs path like /guide/quickstart or a full URL) and explains normalization of .md/.html suffixes and section indexes. This is meaningfully more than the bare 'path_or_url' string in the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (fetch the Markdown for a single docs page) and scopes it against siblings: search-banksapi-docs for broad questions, get-banksapi-overview for page lists, and get-banksapi-openapi-spec implicitly by noting the compact operation index behavior.

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 to use it ('when you need specific page content or code samples'), names the preferred alternative for broad questions, and prescribes a prerequisite (call get-banksapi-overview first). Nothing is left to inference.

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