investec_pb_get_account_transactions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It describes the operation as a retrieval (safe) but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as rate limits, pagination, data freshness, or authorization requirements. The description is insufficient for an agent to assess safety or limitations.

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 a single sentence with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the main purpose and then lists features efficiently. Every word 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 important contextual details for using the tool, such as pagination behavior, maximum date range, ordering of results, or response format. Without an output schema or additional explanation, an agent may not know how to handle large result sets or interpret the response.

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 thoroughly. The description adds no additional meaning beyond mentioning features already covered by parameters (e.g., 'including pending transactions' maps to includePending). Baseline score of 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 verb 'Retrieve' and the resource 'transaction history for a specific Private Banking account', and mentions key features (date filtering, including pending). It distinguishes from sibling tools like investec_pb_get_pending_transactions and investec_cib_get_account_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?

The description implies usage context (date filtering, pending transactions) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like investec_pb_get_pending_transactions. No 'when not to use' or alternative recommendations are provided.

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