list_account_statements

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond that: signed URLs expire and are not accessed by the server, which tells the agent that returned URLs must be used client-side and promptly. This is useful and does not contradict the 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 very short and front-loaded with the core resource ('available statements'), followed by a relevant behavioral caveat about signed URLs. Both clauses earn their place, though the fragment-like phrasing limits clarity.

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?

Although an output schema exists, the description omits essential context such as the account relationship, the nature of the returned statements, expiration details, and any usage caveats beyond URL expiration. It is minimally adequate but leaves an agent to infer most of the tool's purpose and behavior.

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 description does not mention account_id at all, and schema description coverage is 0%. The parameter is self-explanatory from its name and UUID format, but the description fails to connect it to the statements being listed, so it does not compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 identifies the resource ('extratos' / statements) but never states the action explicitly — it says 'available statements' rather than 'lists account statements.' It also does not distinguish this tool from sibling list tools such as list_credit_card_bills or list_transactions, relying on the tool name for that differentiation.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description provides no context about selecting an account, filtering statements, or how this relates to sibling tools like list_transactions or get_account.

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