Connect Bank Account

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

Annotations indicate openWorldHint=true and non-readOnly, but the description adds meaningful detail: it covers searching institutions, credential entry, and MFA verification. This clarifies the interactive, multi-step nature beyond what annotations alone convey, though it doesn't disclose post-completion side effects.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the active verb 'Launch', and each sentence earns its place by describing the wizard's steps. No redundant or vague wording.

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 an interactive tool with no output schema and no parameters, the description covers the main phases (search, credentials, MFA) well. However, it omits what happens after completion (e.g., creating a connection or returning a status), leaving a minor gap in outcome transparency.

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 input schema has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. Baseline for a 0-parameter tool is 4. The description does not need to explain parameters; it adds contextual flow information.

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?

Description clearly states a specific action: 'Launch an interactive wizard to connect a new bank or credit card account.' It distinguishes from siblings like create_connection by emphasizing the interactive, UI-driven nature, making it unique.

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 phrase 'interactive wizard' and 'Renders a guided UI' imply this is for user-facing flows, contrasting with programmatic tools. However, there is no explicit guidance on when NOT to use this tool or mention of alternative like create_connection, so the usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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