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

Description discloses that recategorizing creates a Category Rule affecting future transactions, batch error handling (per-item errors do not fail whole batch), and return shape. Annotations only provide readOnlyHint, etc., so description adds substantial behavioral context.

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 detailed but concise given the complexity, with front-loaded purpose and logical flow from usage to side effects to batch behavior. Every sentence adds value, though could be slightly trimmed.

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 1 parameter, no output schema, and sparse annotations, the description covers purpose, parameter semantics, side effects, error handling, and return format thoroughly, enabling correct tool use.

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 has 0% description coverage for items. Description explains items is an array of {transaction_id, category_id}, clarifies ID origins, and describes batch response shape. This compensates for missing schema descriptions.

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 the tool corrects transaction categories via PATCH /transactions/:id, and distinguishes it from sibling tools by referencing openfinance_list_transactions and openfinance_list_categories for ID sources.

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 'use this to fix miscategorized transactions and improve categorization accuracy going forward.' Describes side effect of creating Category Rules but does not explicitly state when not to use or alternatives.

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