get_account_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Historical balance snapshots' without specifying granularity (daily, monthly?), time range, inclusion of current balance, or read-only nature. The lack of detail hinders agent understanding beyond the basic purpose.

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 a single clear sentence with no filler. While appropriately concise, it lacks structure (e.g., bullet points) that could improve readability for complex details. However, for a simple tool, brevity is acceptable.

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 has one parameter, an output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate but lacks context about output format, example usage, or how to obtain account_id. For a tool with many siblings, more completeness would improve agent decision-making.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not explain the account_id parameter (e.g., format, source, constraints). The description only implies a single account but adds no semantics beyond the schema, leaving the agent without guidance on what value to provide.

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 retrieves 'Historical balance snapshots for a single account,' specifying the verb (get/historical snapshots), resource (account), and scope (single account). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_accounts (which lists accounts) and get_transaction (individual transactions).

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 for obtaining historical balance data for a specific account, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings like get_net_worth_history, get_cash_flow, or get_transactions_summary. No alternative tools or exclusions are mentioned.

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