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

Annotations already cover readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is disclosed. The description adds the login dependency and the requirement of an existing registered account link, which are behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradiction with 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?

A single front-loaded sentence that immediately states the critical prerequisite, followed by a precise purpose statement. No redundant words or extraneous content, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 simple read-only list tool with two well-documented parameters and safety annotations, the description covers all essential usage context: the prerequisite, the scope, and the operation. No output schema exists, but for a list operation the return type is self-evident, and nothing critical is missing.

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 100% with both parameters (include_raw and account_link_id) having detailed descriptions. The description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond what's in the schema, so the baseline of 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?

Description states a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('Shinhan easy-inquiry accounts') within the scope of 'a registered account link.' This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling transaction-history tool (shinhan_easy__accounts__transaction_history__search) whose purpose is different.

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 explicitly states the mandatory prerequisite (prior login call with the same account_link_id), which is critical usage context. It doesn't explicitly list alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, but the prerequisite and the nature of the operation effectively communicate its role.

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