quickbooks_list_deposits

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden. It only mentions routing and authentication scope, but does not disclose whether the operation is read-only, idempotent, or has rate limits. The description adds minimal behavioral insight.

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 and relatively concise, but the first sentence is redundant with the tool name. It could be more efficient by including substantive information about the tool's function.

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 list operation tool, the description should state what is being listed (deposits) and ideally mention the output. It fails to do both. Even with an output schema, the description should provide high-level context, which is missing.

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 only parameter 'arguments' is described as a 'JSON string of arguments for the connector operation,' which adds basic context but is too vague. With 0% schema description coverage, the description does not clarify the structure or required fields of the JSON, leaving the agent with insufficient guidance.

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 restates the tool name ('list_deposits') and notes it's a Quickbooks connector operation, but does not explicitly state that it lists deposits or what a deposit represents. The purpose is implied but not clarified, making it vague.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as quickbooks_list_payments or quickbooks_list_invoices. The description lacks any context about typical use cases or exclusions.

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