list_pots

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, nor does it describe what happens with an invalid account_id, whether results are paginated, or what pot properties are returned. The verb 'List' implies non-mutation, but this is not an explicit disclosure.

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 a single, direct sentence that front-loads the action and resource. Every word is necessary and there is no filler, redundancy, or over-specification.

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 simple one-parameter list tool, the description covers the core action, but it omits expected return shape (no output schema) and does not tell the agent how to source a valid account_id. The absent output schema suggests the description should mention what a 'pot' listing contains; this is a clear but non-critical gap.

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 already documents the sole parameter account_id with a descriptive comment, giving 100% coverage. The tool description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, so a 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 uses an active verb (List) with a specific resource (Monzo pots) and clear scope (linked to an account). It is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like list_accounts, which return accounts, and deposit/withdraw tools, which modify pots.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites such as obtaining a valid account_id from list_accounts, nor does it say when a different tool would be more appropriate. The description only states the action, not the context.

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