find_bank_bonuses

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the result cap ('up to 10') and the heuristic nature ('likely'), which is useful, but it does not mention sorting behavior, error cases, or what happens with no filters. This is adequate but lacks depth.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the tool's purpose, scope, and filters without any wasted words. Every element adds value.

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 presence of an output schema, return values need not be described. The description covers the core behavior (find bank-bonus articles with filters) and the key limit (up to 10). It omits trivial details like filter combination logic (AND/OR) and default ordering, but these are not critical for a simple search tool.

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?

With 0% schema_description_coverage, the description compensates by semantically mapping each parameter: bank→institution, state→USPS state, amount_min→minimum dollar-mention. This adds meaning beyond the bare property names, though it omits format constraints like state abbreviation style or amount units.

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 uses a specific verb 'Find' with a clear resource ('bank-bonus source articles') and scope ('up to 10 likely'), making its purpose immediately clear. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like search_posts and find_credit_card_offers by focusing on bank-bonus articles with optional filters.

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 usage context is implied: use this tool when you need to find bank-bonus articles with optional institution, state, or amount filters. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, leaving the guidance at an implied level.

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