create_account

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

The annotations only indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description carries meaningful weight. It clearly states this is a creation action and adds that the new account ID is returned for immediate use in transactions. It does not overpromise or 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?

Two sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the return-value note is placed immediately after, making the description easy to parse and act on.

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?

For a simple 3-parameter create operation, the description is nearly complete: it names the action, the account type distinction, and the important return value. Since there is no output schema, mentioning the returned account ID is especially valuable. Minor details like validation or conflict behavior are absent but not critical for this tool.

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 the schema already documents all three parameters and their meanings. The description adds little beyond restating the on-budget/off-budget concept and the return behavior, which is acceptable given full schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb ('Create') and resource ('budget account'), and clarifies the on-budget/off-budget distinction. It also mentions the return value, which helps distinguish this tool from other create tools like create_category or create_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?

The tool's purpose is clear: use it to create a new budget account. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling set contains no competing tool for creating accounts, and the practical follow-up use case (targeting transactions) is mentioned.

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