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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses ordering (newest first) and geographic scope (US), but omits what 'recent' means (time window), whether results are paginated or capped, and the subscriber-auth requirement — the 'PRO' prefix hints at it but never states it.

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?

One compact sentence with the resource and ordering front-loaded; nothing is wasted. The cryptic 'PRO.' prefix is the only slightly unclear element.

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 3-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description leaves too much open: since_year semantics, the definition of 'recent', the auth/token requirement, and any result limits are all unaddressed.

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 description coverage is only 33%. The description clarifies that state is an optional filter, but says nothing about since_year, which is entirely undocumented in both schema and description, so the agent cannot tell what it constrains.

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 resource (recent US bank failures and acquirers), an ordering (newest first), and a scope modifier (optional state filter). It is clearly distinct from siblings like bank_check and bank_profile, though it never names them explicitly.

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 guidance on when to use this versus bank_check, bank_profile, or state_screen, and no prerequisites mentioned. The only usage signal is the implied 'use this to list failures' from the title-like phrasing.

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