attach_file_to_transaction

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

Beyond the idempotentHint=false annotation, the description discloses important behavioral details: file size limit, allowed MIME types, and that the file is read from the host filesystem. No contradictions.

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 with no wasted words. First sentence covers purpose and constraints, second adds context. Efficient and well-structured.

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 covers key aspects but omits return value or error behavior. Without an output schema, the agent lacks information on success/failure indicators, such as whether an attachment ID is returned or what happens on errors.

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 input schema already documents all four parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by specifying file size and type constraints, but does not significantly elaborate on individual parameter meaning 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 action (attach), resource (transaction), and key constraints (max 10MB, allowed MIME types). It distinguishes this tool from siblings as the only one for attaching files.

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 specifies when to use (attach a file to a transaction) and lists constraints (size, types). However, it does not explicitly tell when not to use or mention alternatives like delete_transaction_attachment for other attachment operations.

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