get_income_tool

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It adds meaningful context about the Plaid-only restriction and the product requirement, which are important behavioral constraints. However, it does not mention error behavior, return structure, or what happens if the product is not enabled.

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 extremely concise at two short sentences, with the core purpose front-loaded and the prerequisite/limitation stated immediately after. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant 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 tool's simplicity, zero parameters, and absence of an output schema, the description is mostly complete for selection and invocation. It provides the key prerequisites and platform limitation, though it could have briefly stated that the return value is a list of income streams.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the empty schema fully documents the calling contract. The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed; the baseline for a no-parameter tool is appropriate here.

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 identifies the resource as 'bank-detected income streams' and the tool name supplies the 'get' verb, making the purpose unambiguous. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools by domain, though it does not explicitly compare against them.

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 states the prerequisite of the Income product being enabled and explicitly restricts the tool to Plaid, noting Teller lacks INCOME capability. This gives clear context for when the tool is usable, though it does not discuss when to prefer it over alternative data sources.

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