importTransactions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool initiates an import process, is equivalent to manual action, and returns imported transaction IDs. However, it does not specify whether the import is synchronous, rate limits, or permission requirements.

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 three sentences long, front-loading the core action. It is efficient and avoids redundancy, though the analogy could be condensed without loss of clarity.

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 single parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, input meaning, and response content. Minor gaps include missing details on error handling and synchronous vs asynchronous behavior.

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 schema provides a description for plan_id, including special values. The tool description does not add new parameter information beyond the schema, but schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline score of 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 imports available transactions on all linked accounts for a given plan, using specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes from sibling tools like createTransaction or getTransactions by emphasizing the import initiation from financial institutions.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool, including an analogy to clicking 'Import' in web/mobile. However, it lacks explicit exclusion criteria or mention of alternative tools for similar tasks, such as fetching existing transactions.

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