Get Applicant History

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the retrieval, ordering, and identification method but does not mention authentication, rate limits, pagination, or safety aspects. Minimal but adequate for a simple read operation.

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?

Single sentence of 19 words, front-loaded with the action, no waste. Every part is necessary.

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?

The description is complete for a simple single-parameter retrieval tool without output schema. It explains what is returned and ordering. Could be slightly improved by hinting at the return structure, but overall it is sufficient.

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% with a well-described email parameter. The description adds 'identified by their email address' which mirrors the schema. No additional nuance is provided, so baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'retrieve', the resource 'previous loan applications for an applicant', the identifier 'email address', and the ordering 'most recent first'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like SearchLoansByPhone which uses a different identifier.

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 implies usage when needing loan history by email, and the context signals list alternatives, but the description itself does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus others. It provides clear context without exclusions.

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