Transactions Get Transaction Splits

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so safety is covered. However, the description adds no further behavioral context such as what data is returned (e.g., list of splits with amounts, categories) or any constraints.

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?

At one sentence, it is concise but too brief for a tool with 4 parameters. It is not wasteful but under-specified, balancing between brevity and adequacy.

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?

Missing output schema and no description of return value; the tool's behavior (e.g., returning splits for a transaction) is implied but not explained. With related sibling tools, more context would help.

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 50% (fields and output_mode have descriptions, session_path and transaction_id only have titles). The description adds no extra meaning for any parameter, failing to compensate for undocumented parameters.

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 'Get transaction splits' clearly states the action (get) and resource (transaction splits), distinguishing it from sibling tools like transactions_get_transaction or transactions_unsplit_transaction.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., transactions_get_transaction for full details, transactions_list_transactions for all transactions). The description lacks context for selection.

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