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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the session dependency and single-account scoping, which is useful behavioral context. It doesn't cover pagination, result limits, or date-range constraints beyond the schema, but with annotations present the bar is lower and no contradiction exists.

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?

Two sentences with zero filler. The critical prerequisite is front-loaded in caps, and the purpose sentence conveys verb, resource, scope, and execution context without redundancy.

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 read-only search tool with a self-describing name and 63% schema coverage, the description covers the key operational gotcha — the login prerequisite — plus the single-account scope. No output schema exists, so the missing return-format detail is a minor gap, not a critical one.

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 coverage is 63%, so the parameters are mostly self-documenting. The description adds meaningful semantic value by clarifying this tool searches exactly 'one registered account', which disambiguates bank_account_credential_id from the plural bank_account_credential_ids array. It doesn't add date-format or sort semantics beyond the schema, so a 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Search transaction history') with clear scope ('for one registered KB Kookmin Bank fast-account'). The explicit bank name differentiates it from the similar sibling shinhan_easy__accounts__transaction_history__search, and 'one registered account' disambiguates it from multi-account list tools.

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 gives a hard prerequisite ('REQUIRES prior kb_fast_account__session__login call with same account_link_id'), which is exactly the kind of sequencing guidance an agent needs. It identifies the provider session as the execution context, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it.

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