List Bank Accounts

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds value by specifying return fields (alias, IBAN with security note, currency, balance, last sync timestamp) beyond annotations, providing useful behavioral context. Score 4 for clear additional 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 concise with two sentences (plus bilingual translation) that are front-loaded with the purpose. Every sentence earns its place, and the translation is necessary for a multilingual context. No wasted words.

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 presence of an output schema, the description need not fully explain return values but does mention them along with a security note. It covers the core functionality adequately for a simple list tool, but lacks mention of pagination behavior, though parameters cover it. Score 4.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters (limit, offset). The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 lists all connected bank accounts for the workspace, using the verb 'list' and specifying the resource. While it distinguishes from siblings like 'get_bank_account' by naming convention, it does not explicitly differentiate, so scores a 4 for clear but no sibling differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_bank_account' for specific accounts. No explicit context or exclusion criteria are provided, resulting in a score of 2 (no guidance).

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