bank.lookup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behaviors. It mentions inputs and outputs but lacks information on authorization, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only. This leaves gaps in behavioral understanding.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, and efficiently communicates all necessary information 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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the tool's functionality well by listing input criteria and output fields. It could be improved by mentioning pagination (limit/offset) and error handling, but it is largely sufficient for its simplicity.

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 57%. The description groups parameters into lookup categories (e.g., name, certificate) and describes return fields, adding value beyond the schema. However, it does not explain defaults, constraints, or all parameters like limit and offset.

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 looks up FDIC-insured US banks, specifies lookup methods (fuzzy name, certificate, RSSD ID, state), and lists return fields. It is distinct from sibling tools which are about other entities like aircraft or airports.

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 implies when to use the tool (for bank lookups) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives. Context is clear but lacks exclusions or comparison with other tools.

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