get_financial_overviewRetrieve a one-call snapshot of every Starling Bank account balance—cleared, effective, total including spaces—plus each savings and spending space balance.
One-call snapshot of every account: balances (cleared, effective, total including spaces), plus each savings space and spending space with its balance. Uses 1 + 2 requests per account.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world semantics, so the burden is low. The description still adds real value by disclosing the cost profile ('Uses 1 + 2 requests per account') and enumerating which balance types and spaces are returned, which matters because there is no output schema.
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, front-loaded with the outcome and followed by the cost note, with no redundant restatement of the title or annotations.
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?
With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does enumerate the shape of the snapshot (cleared/effective/total balances, savings and spending spaces). It omits any error or partial-failure behavior, which slightly limits completeness for an aggregate call.
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 takes zero parameters, so per the rubric the baseline is 4; there is nothing for the description to clarify beyond the implicit 'all accounts' scope.
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?
States a specific resource and an aggregation verb: 'one-call snapshot of every account' with balances and spaces. It is clearly distinguishable in behavior from list_accounts and get_account_balance because it aggregates them, though it never names those siblings explicitly.
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?
'One-call snapshot' implies the usage case (fetch everything at once rather than making many calls), but there is no explicit when-to-use vs. when-to-use-an-alternative statement, nor any exclusions such as 'prefer list_accounts for pagination'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.