bank_list_banks

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description carries the rest of the burden. It usefully discloses that the data comes from the Enable Banking provider and that returned names are exact-match identifiers for downstream linking, but it says nothing about country scoping, empty results, or freshness of the list.

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?

A single short sentence with the key fact (exact name for bank_link_start) front-loaded and no filler. Its brevity, however, is partly achieved by omitting important parameter information.

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?

Low complexity and no output schema lower the bar, but with two undocumented parameters the definition is not sufficient on its own; an agent must open the schema to learn that filtering by search text or country is possible.

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%, so the description must compensate and it does not: neither the 'search' string nor the 'country' code (which defaults to IT and must be 2 characters) is mentioned. An agent reading only the description would not know it can filter at all.

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 names the resource (banks linkable via Enable Banking) and implicitly the verb via the tool name, and it distinguishes itself from bank_link_start by casting itself as the source of the exact name that tool needs. It does not explicitly say 'list/returns' but the intent is unambiguous for an agent.

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?

It implies usage ('exact name to use in bank_link_start'), which tells the agent this is a prerequisite lookup for the linking flow, but it never states when not to call it or how to narrow the results with the available filters.

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