freeagent_list_transactions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds default filtering behavior and output fields, but it does not describe pagination, rate limits, or edge cases. This is moderate additional value, thus a 3.

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 first three sentences are clear and front-loaded, but the final sentence about checking email/local sources before asking the user is a lengthy tangent that, while useful, is not essential to describing the tool's core function. This prevents a top score.

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 simple listing nature, the schema's full parameter documentation, and the annotations, the description provides enough context: default view, required ID source, and return fields. It lacks only deeper response details, but the mentioned fields suffice. A 4 is justified.

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 covers all 6 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds a useful pointer for bankAccountId, but no additional syntax or format details beyond the schema.

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 'List bank account transactions from FreeAgent' with a specific verb and resource. It further clarifies the default view (unexplained) and return fields, making it distinct from sibling listing tools for contacts, invoices, etc.

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 instructs to 'Use bankAccountId from freeagent_list_bank_accounts', providing a clear prerequisite. It implies the tool's intended use for listing transactions but does not explicitly state alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, so a 4 is appropriate.

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