get_statement

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively describes rate limits ('1 request per 60 seconds'), constraints ('Max period: 31 days + 1 hour'), data transformation rules (currency conversion, timestamp formatting), and output filtering (omitted fields), providing comprehensive behavioral context.

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 efficiently structured with a clear purpose statement followed by rate limits, constraints, and specific rules in a numbered list format. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it easy to parse and understand.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description does an excellent job covering behavioral aspects, constraints, and data transformations. However, it doesn't explicitly describe the return format or structure of the statement data, which would be helpful given the lack of output schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all three parameters thoroughly. The description adds some context about default account behavior ('account_id = '0' unless another is specified') and timestamp usage, but doesn't provide significant additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema offers.

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 specific action ('Get account statement') and resource ('for a given period'), distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'get_client_info' which presumably retrieves different information. It provides concrete details about what the tool does beyond just the name.

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 usage by specifying a period requirement and default account behavior, but it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusion criteria. It offers some context but lacks explicit guidance on tool selection.

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