getTransactions

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a concrete behavioral trait—the 300-transaction limit—and recommends a mitigation strategy, adding genuine transparency beyond what the name implies. It does not discuss read-only status or response format, but the disclosed limit is a key behavioral constraint.

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 brief and front-loaded: one sentence states the purpose, followed by a warning and recommendation. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 list operation, optional filters, and presence of an output schema, the description provides the essential context: what it does and the critical limit. It could mention default behavior or scope (e.g., whether transfers are included), but the combination of schema, output schema, and description is sufficiently complete for typical use.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds practical meaning by explaining that start_date and end_date should be used to break queries into smaller periods due to the limit, which goes beyond the schema's simple date format descriptions.

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 'Lista as movimentações' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating it lists transactions. The name distinguishes it from sibling getTransaction, but the description itself does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, earning a 4 rather than 5.

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 provides guidance on using start_date and end_date to avoid the 300-transaction limit, but it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives like getTransaction or getTransfers. The usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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