get_accounts_and_cards

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine context beyond that: it returns balances, card types, statuses, overdraft info and product IDs, and notably that results span both Ameria cards and linked external cards. It does not mention auth requirements or rate limits, but the added scope detail is meaningful.

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?

Three tight sentences, each earning its place: purpose, return contents, and the ordering instruction. The most actionable guidance (call this first) is placed last where it caps the read.

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 no output schema, the description carries the burden of describing returns and does so well, listing the concrete fields. Minor gaps remain around pagination or failure behavior, but for a zero-param discovery call this is nearly 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 tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing to document and the baseline is 4. The description correctly avoids inventing filter semantics that the empty schema does not support.

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 all accounts and cards), names the source system, and enumerates the data returned. It explicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by positioning itself as the discovery step preceding get_available_balance and get_account_events.

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 says 'Call this FIRST to discover available account/card IDs before using get_available_balance or get_account_events,' naming the alternatives and the condition that selects them. The sequencing guidance is unambiguous.

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