get_treasury_statements

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It helpfully enumerates return fields (downloadUrl, periodStart, periodEnd, documentType, description, creationDate), which discloses the response shape, but it never states that this is a read-only operation, whether pagination is cursor-based, or any permission requirements.

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 core action, followed by return fields and filter values. No filler and nothing buried.

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 usefully compensates by listing the returned fields. The only shortfall is that cursor-based pagination semantics (start_after/end_before) are left entirely to the schema, but overall the definition is sufficient to call the tool correctly.

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 100%, so all six parameters are already documented, including the documentType enum and the cursor fields. The description merely repeats the documentType enum values the schema already provides, adding no new format or constraint detail.

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 (Retrieve) and resource (statements) scoped to a 'specific Mercury treasury account', which cleanly separates it from siblings like get_account_statements and get_treasury_transactions. An agent can pick it without opening a schema.

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?

Usage is implied by the resource and the documentType filter, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or comparison against alternatives such as get_account_statements. Nothing routes the agent when both could plausibly apply.

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