Get Debt Transactions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions 'List transactions flagged as debts or loans', which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as authentication needs, rate limits, or what 'flagged' entails (e.g., criteria or source). This leaves gaps for an AI agent to understand how it behaves beyond the basic action.

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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It is front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple tool, earning full marks for conciseness.

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 complexity (0 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It explains what the tool does but lacks details on return values (since no output schema), behavioral context, or usage guidelines. For a read operation with no parameters, it meets the basic requirement but could be more complete by addressing sibling differentiation or output expectations.

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?

The tool has 0 parameters, and the schema description coverage is 100% (though empty). The description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable since there are no parameters to document. A baseline of 4 is appropriate as it doesn't need to compensate for any missing schema details.

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 ('List') and resource ('transactions flagged as debts or loans'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_debts' or 'get_transactions', which might have overlapping functionality, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_debts' or 'get_transactions', nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. It only states what it does, without context for selection among siblings.

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