Process CAMT.053

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds mode-specific behavior (parse is read-only, execute creates transactions), providing useful context beyond annotations. It could be more explicit about the destructive nature of execute, but overall good.

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 succinct sentences with no fluff. The description is front-loaded with the overall scope, then details modes. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description lacks information about return values (no output schema) and error conditions. For a multi-mode tool, this is a gap. However, given high schema coverage and annotations, it is minimally viable but not fully complete.

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 parameters. The description itself does not add extra meaning beyond the schema descriptions; it merely restates mode options. Baseline 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 the tool processes CAMT.053 files with three distinct modes (parse, dry_run, execute), making the purpose clear. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, though the name and context imply it's the only CAMT.053 tool.

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 clear guidance on when to use each mode: parse for inspection, dry_run for preview, execute for creation after approval. It does not mention when not to use this tool or alternatives, but among siblings there are no other CAMT.053 tools, so the guidance is adequate.

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