netsuite_get_bank_accounts_by_subsidiary

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden. It discloses the filter (type='Bank'), the subsidiary scoping, and the exact return fields ({ id, acctnumber, fullname, description }). It doesn't cover edge cases or errors, but for a simple read-only get, this is adequate transparency.

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 sentences, both informative: purpose stated first, then expected return shape. No unnecessary words, and the structure is well-suited for quick scanning.

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?

With a single parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, required parameter, and return format. It lacks error/empty-result handling, but for this simple get tool it is sufficiently 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?

The schema has zero description coverage and only provides the type 'string' for subsidiaryId. The description adds that it's 'Required' and for 'a given subsidiary', but it doesn't specify whether it's an internal ID or offer an example. This partially compensates for the low schema coverage but lacks depth.

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 'Get', the specific resource 'bank accounts (type = 'Bank')', and the scope 'for a given subsidiary'. This distinguishes it from siblings like netsuite_get_accounts, which is more general.

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 gives clear context: it requires a subsidiaryId and returns only bank accounts. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, but the 'type = Bank' and 'by subsidiary' context make the intended use clear.

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