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

The description adds important behavioral context beyond annotations, such as the potential presence of a provider_incident block and the warning that credit limits/balances may be unreliable. Annotations already indicate readOnly and idempotent, so the description enhances transparency.

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 description is three concise sentences: first sentence defines the core purpose, second explains the batch shape, third provides a critical reliability warning. No wasted words.

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?

The description covers the purpose, parameter constraints, batch shape, and a reliability caveat. While no output schema exists, the description provides enough context for safe usage, though additional detail on the account object structure could be beneficial.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description fully compensates by explaining the account_ids parameter, including array length constraints (1-50) and the batch shape. This adds meaning beyond the raw 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns full account objects including extended creditData, specifies the HTTP endpoint, and mentions the batch shape. This distinguishes it from siblings like openfinance_list_accounts, which likely returns summaries.

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?

The description provides constraints on account_ids (array of 1-50) and warns about provider incidents affecting data reliability, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like openfinance_list_accounts or openfinance_get_account_balance.

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