Query Pluggy accounts and transactions with SQL

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavior beyond that: a 15-minute in-memory collection cache, returned coverage metadata, and the fact that accounts include connections with zero transactions — a non-obvious data-shape caveat.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and scope, with no redundant restatement of the name or title. The prerequisite call is placed last, where an agent will read it before invoking.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description partially compensates by mentioning coverage metadata and the accounts-without-transactions case. It is nearly complete for a 4-parameter read tool, but the absence of date-format and limit guidance leaves a small gap.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the parameter burden. It clarifies that sql is a SELECT-only SQLite query and that from/to delimit a UTC period, but gives no date format and never mentions the limit parameter or its 200-row cap, leaving meaningful gaps.

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 verb and dialect (read-only SQLite SELECT) over named resources (accounts and transactions) scoped to a UTC period. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling by naming pluggy_schema as a prerequisite rather than an alternative query path.

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?

Gives explicit sequencing guidance ("Call pluggy_schema before computing totals") and implies the tool's role is querying for aggregates over a period. It does not, however, state when NOT to use it or contrast it with a filtering alternative, since pluggy_schema is the only sibling.

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