get_account_events

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds useful context: the prerequisite lookup flow and where accountId comes from, plus the amount filter behavior. It doesn't cover pagination behavior, but schema param descriptions handle that.

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, front-loaded with the core operation, followed by the prerequisite. No filler. The example ID is helpful rather than wasteful, though marginally redundant with the schema example.

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 readOnly/idempotent annotations and 100% schema coverage, the description covers purpose, prerequisite, and filter semantics adequately. Pagination is left to the schema, which is appropriate; nothing critical for a correct call is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so parameters are already documented. The description still adds value by giving a concrete example ('31023550200') and clarifying accountId provenance from cards/accounts, reinforcing the schema's parenthetical. Slightly beyond baseline but not exhaustive.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Get past events (transactions)') scoped to 'a specific Ameria Bank account,' and distinguishes itself from siblings like get_transactions/search_transactions by its account+amount filtering. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly names the prerequisite tool ('Use get_accounts_and_cards first to find the accountId') and the exact source field, and states the filtering conditions. This is actionable when-to-use guidance, not mere implication.

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