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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false) match the read-only nature. Description adds that reconnect_url does not consume a connection slot and does not require disconnecting, which is valuable behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Description is slightly long but front-loaded with the main purpose. Each sentence adds value, explaining the response and the specific URLs. No wasted words, but could be slightly tighter.

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?

Given no parameters and no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns and the meaning of key fields. It provides complete context for an agent to select and use this tool among many openfinance_* siblings.

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?

No parameters; schema coverage is 100% (empty object). Description adds meaning by detailing the response fields and their purposes (reconnect_url vs add_connection_url), which is essential for an agent to interpret the output.

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?

Description clearly states 'Returns the saved bank connections for this install' and lists specific returned fields (connector_id, item_id, bank name, reconnect_url, add_connection_url). This distinguishes it from siblings like openfinance_list_accounts which list different resources.

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 explains when to use reconnect_url (for re-authentication) and contrasts it with add_connection_url for adding new banks. It does not explicitly compare to other list tools or state when not to use this tool, but the usage is intuitive for listing connections.

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