isw_resolve_bank_account

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It suggests a read-only operation (resolve) but gives no details on side effects, authentication requirements, rate limits, or error behavior. This leaves significant behavioral uncertainty.

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 concise (five words) but at the expense of completeness. It front-loads the core action but omits essential context, making it minimally usable.

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?

With no output schema, no parameter descriptions, and no annotations, the description fails to cover the tool's full context. The agent has no information about return values, error handling, or prerequisites, leaving the tool incomplete.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain the purpose of 'beneficiaryAccountNumber' or 'beneficiaryBankCode'. The agent must infer from names alone, which is inadequate for correct invocation.

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 states it resolves an account name before a transfer, which is a specific verb-resource pair. However, 'resolve' is vague and does not clarify whether it validates, retrieves, or confirms the name. It distinguishes from siblings (which are transfer-related) but lacks precision.

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 before a transfer but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No when-not or context for excluding other tools.

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