find_transactions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions returning Id and key fields, but does not disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only (though implied). The limit parameter is not explained in the description.

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 three sentences with no redundancy. It starts with the core purpose, then lists txn_type values, and finally explains date range and entity filters. Every sentence 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 9 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is somewhat incomplete. It does not explain the output structure beyond 'Id + key fields', nor does it clarify the behavior of the limit parameter or single date parameter. The description is adequate but not fully comprehensive for a parameter-rich 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It covers txn_type, date_start/date_end, customer, and vendor, but not doc_number, date, amount, or limit. The description adds some meaning beyond the schema (e.g., txn_type list, customer/vendor mapping), but incomplete parameter documentation reduces effectiveness.

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 states it searches QBO transactions by metadata and returns Id plus key fields. This differentiates from siblings like get_transaction (single transaction retrieval) and update_transaction (modification). The verb 'Search' and resource 'transactions' are specific.

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 description specifies that txn_type must be one of the listed types, and provides guidance on using customer vs vendor filters. It states 'provide at least one filter', implying when to use additional parameters. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool compared to alternatives like get_transaction or query.

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