create_bank_account

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Create a new bank account,' omitting details about expected input structure, validation requirements, side effects, or error behavior. For a write operation with a loosely specified parameter, this is insufficient.

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 wasted words; the core action is front-loaded and easily parsed. However, given the need for additional context, it is terse, but as an efficiency measure it is appropriately concise for a simple creation statement.

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 tool involves a complex nested parameter, no annotations, and a broad API context with many sibling tools. An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but the description still lacks essential context: input requirements, usage context, and differentiation from related tools. It is minimally viable but clearly incomplete.

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 input schema defines a single 'bank_account_data' object with additionalProperties:true and no descriptions, while schema coverage is 0%. The description does not mention this parameter or provide any guidance on what data to include, so the agent has no semantic grounding for the parameter.

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 identifies the action ('Create') and the resource ('bank account'), using a specific verb and object. However, it does not differentiate this tool from the many sibling create_* tools, and the meaning of 'bank account' in this domain is not clarified.

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 no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_bank_account or list_bank_accounts. It simply states the action without any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the tool name.

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