billy_get_bank_line

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

The 'READ-ONLY' label explicitly states the tool has no destructive side effects, which is valuable given no annotations. However, it does not disclose error behavior (e.g., what happens if ID is invalid), response format, or any rate limits or auth requirements, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 extremely concise at two short phrases: 'Fetch one bank line. READ-ONLY.' Every word adds value, no filler or redundancy. It is structured with a clear verb-object statement followed by a behavioral hint.

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 the tool has one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is inadequate. It explains the basic action but lacks context on return values, error handling, or how this tool fits into the broader bank line workflow (e.g., matching, listing).

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 single parameter 'id' has no description in the schema (0% coverage), and the description adds no meaning about its format, source, or constraints. The agent cannot infer what kind of ID to provide or how to obtain it.

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 'Fetch one bank line' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the tool retrieves a single bank line. It distinguishes from the sibling tool billy_list_bank_lines which lists many, and from other get tools by specifying 'bank line'. The 'READ-ONLY' label further clarifies the nature.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like billy_list_bank_lines, billy_match_bank_line, or other get tools. Usage is only implied by the description of fetching one bank line; no conditions, prerequisites, or prohibitions are stated.

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