List Transactions

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds useful context: pagination behavior and brief vs full view. No side effects mentioned, but annotations cover safety adequately.

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?

Extremely concise: two sentences with no fluff. First sentence establishes purpose and pagination; second sentence details view options and alternative tool. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 list tool with 14 parameters and no output schema, the description covers key aspects: pagination and view detail. The schema fills in filter details. Most agents would find this adequate to invoke 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 coverage is 100% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description adds marginal value by mentioning pagination and view options, but the schema already explicates these. Baseline 3 due to high 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?

Description states it lists bank transactions with pagination. Distinguishes from sibling 'get_transaction' by noting that 'get_transaction' provides full detail, while this tool returns brief view by default. Specific verb+resource with sibling 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?

Description notes that for full detail, one can pass view='full' or call get_transaction, implying a when-to-use alternative. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool compared to other list tools (e.g., list_accounts). Clear context but no exclusions.

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