Connect Bank Account

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (not read-only, not destructive, open-world). The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations by disclosing that the tool renders a UI, requires credential entry, and handles MFA verification. 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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The core action is front-loaded, and the second sentence efficiently summarizes what the wizard does. Every sentence earns its place.

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 zero-parameter, interactive wizard tool, the description gives enough context for an agent to know what will happen when invoked. It could be more explicit about what the wizard returns or whether the connection is fully established on completion, but given the minimal invocation surface, this is a minor gap.

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 tool has zero parameters and full schema coverage, so there is nothing for the description to document. Per the zero-parameter baseline, the description appropriately focuses on the tool's behavior instead of parameter details.

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 launches an interactive wizard to connect a bank or credit card account, and it names the concrete steps (searching institutions, entering credentials, handling MFA). This distinguishes it from siblings like create_connection, which presumably handles programmatic connection creation rather than a guided UI.

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 this tool is for interactive, user-driven flows by highlighting the wizard and guided UI, but it never explicitly contrasts it with alternatives such as create_connection or states when the programmatic path should be used. The guidance is contextual but not explicit.

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