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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds critical transparency about the provider_incident block, warning that credit limits and balances may be unreliable during provider incidents. This goes beyond annotations to guide safe interpretation of results.

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 sentences: first states the purpose and HTTP method, second specifies parameter usage with batch limit, third explains an edge case. All sentences are necessary and front-loaded with the most important information.

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 return shape ({ results, errors }), parameter usage, and an important edge case (provider_incident). It lacks details on the full structure of account objects, but given the absence of an output schema, it provides sufficient context for safe usage.

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?

The schema has one parameter (account_ids) with no description. The description adds the array size constraint (1-50) and clarifies that these are account IDs for which detailed objects are returned, providing essential meaning beyond the bare 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 with extended creditData per ID, and specifies the HTTP method GET /accounts/:id. It differentiates from siblings like openfinance_list_accounts (list all accounts) and openfinance_get_account_balance (balance only) by focusing on detailed, batch retrieval for specific accounts.

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 specifies the batch size limit (1-50) and the batch response shape, providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over alternatives like list_accounts or get_account_balance, though the purpose implicitly distinguishes them.

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