update_bank_account

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

With no annotations, the description is the sole source for behavioral disclosure. It states 'update' but does not explain side effects, idempotency, permission requirements, or validation behavior. The word 'existing' hints at a prerequisite but is insufficient for safe operation.

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 and extremely short, which is concise in length, but the brevity omits crucial details. It is under-specified rather than appropriately sized, as the open-ended data object and usage conditions are left unexplained.

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 has a nested object parameter and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the role of bank_account_data, whether updates are partial or full, or what the response contains. It also fails to contrast with sibling tools in the same domain.

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 shows bank_account_id and bank_account_data, but the description provides no explanation of these parameters. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails entirely to clarify that bank_account_data is an open object, leaving the agent without guidance on what to pass.

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 ('update') and the resource ('bank account'), which distinguishes it from create/get/list operations. It is specific and unambiguous, though it lacks detail on what fields can be updated.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus create_bank_account or get_bank_account, nor any prerequisites or constraints. The phrase 'existing bank account' implies one must already exist, but no alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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