Process CAMT.053

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so mutation is expected. Description adds context about the workflow phases but doesn't detail side effects beyond creation (e.g., no mention of what gets destroyed or auth needs).

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?

Single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists modes succinctly. No unnecessary words.

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 tool's multi-mode nature and 7 parameters, the description covers the workflow adequately. Missing details on return values (no output schema), but overall sufficient for an agent to understand usage.

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%, so all 7 parameters have descriptions. The description adds high-level grouping (modes) but doesn't provide new meaning beyond what's already in the schema.

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 clearly states the tool is for processing CAMT.053 bank statements via three modes (parse, dry_run, execute), distinguishing it from sibling tools like parse_lightyear_statement or import_wise_transactions.

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?

Explicitly describes when to use each mode: parse for inspection, dry_run for preview, execute for final creation after approval. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' but provides clear context.

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