postgrid_list_bank_accounts

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state that account and routing numbers are masked, which is valuable output-behavior context. However, it does not explicitly confirm read-only semantics, pagination behavior, or any other side effects beyond what the schema implies.

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 brief sentences with no filler. The core purpose is stated first, and the security-relevant masking note is included without adding unnecessary length.

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?

For a simple, no-required-parameter list operation, the description covers the essential purpose and a key output characteristic. With no output schema, it could have explained return structure or pagination defaults in more detail, but the schema already covers pagination parameters, so the description is reasonably 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so skip and limit are already fully documented in the input schema. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline score of 3 appropriate.

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 ('List') and resource ('bank accounts'), clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like get, create, and delete bank account operations. The note about masked account and routing numbers adds useful specificity without ambiguity.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as postgrid_get_bank_account or the other list tools. The intended use case is implied by the name and verb, but there are no explicit context cues, exclusions, or alternative routing.

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