list_cash_transactions

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds substantial behavioral details: pagination mechanism, field types (ISO 8601 timestamps, decimal strings), transaction types, direction, statuses, and rate limit. No contradictions with annotations.

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 paragraph with clear, front-loaded purpose. It is informative without being verbose, though it could be slightly more concise by moving some inline field explanations to the schema.

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 presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers pagination, field formats, and status values. It provides enough context for an agent to use the tool correctly, though it does not explain all edge cases.

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 100% coverage with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, such as mentioning 'newest pages first' and the response structure. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 it lists transactions of a cash account with newest pages first, and mentions the API endpoint. This verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools, which focus on balances, trading, and other financial data.

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 provides detailed pagination instructions but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No alternative tools for transaction listing exist among siblings, so the guidance is adequate but not explicit.

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