Import transaksjoner fra Nordnet-CSV

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 file encoding (UTF-16 LE TSV), exactly which row types are translated, and that other rows are skipped with reasons. It does not mention authentication or rate limits, but for a file import tool these details are reasonable.

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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. The first sentence states the core action and output, the second clarifies processing rules. Every sentence adds value.

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 1-parameter input and no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (canonical transaction array, classification hints, skip report) and its relationship to calculate_aksjegevinst. This is complete for a preparatory import tool.

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 single parameter 'filsti' is fully described in the schema with 'Absolutt sti til Nordnet CSV-eksport'. The tool description additionally specifies the exact encoding (UTF-16 LE TSV) which is crucial for correct usage, adding value 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 the tool reads a Nordnet CSV export and returns a canonical transaction array for use with calculate_aksjegevinst. It also specifies which row types are processed (KJØPT/SALG/INNLEGG OVERFØRING) and which are skipped, making its purpose distinct from sibling calculation tools.

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 explicitly states it is for Nordnet CSV imports and serves as a preparation step for calculate_aksjegevinst. It implies no alternative usage but does not include explicit when-not-to-use guidance. However, sibling tools are all calculators, so the context is clear.

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