billy_unmatch_bank_line

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

The description discloses that the tool requires confirm:true to execute and that without it, it returns a dry-run preview. This adds behavioral context beyond the input schema. No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden.

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, using two sentences to convey purpose, operation type, and key requirement. No redundant information.

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 two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and confirm flow. It could be improved by explaining what 'associationId' represents and any post-conditions, but it is largely adequate.

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 description adds meaning to the 'confirm' parameter by explaining the dry-run vs. execution behavior. However, the required 'associationId' parameter is not described beyond its type, leaving its role unclear.

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 action ('Remove a bank-line reconciliation') and the resource ('bank line'). It is specific and distinguishes from the sibling tool 'billy_match_bank_line'.

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 indicates it's a WRITE operation requiring confirm:true, implying the user must explicitly confirm. However, it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.

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