get_item

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. The description only states the purpose (fetching an item and its accounts) and provides no information about side effects, permissions, error cases, or read-only nature. This is minimal and insufficient for full transparency.

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 sentence that immediately conveys the core purpose. It has no filler or redundant content, making it appropriately concise and front-loaded.

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 low complexity (one parameter, no output schema), the description provides some return context by mentioning accounts, but it lacks explanation of the parameter format and any behavioral details. It is minimally viable but has gaps in completeness.

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 0%; the description does not explain what the 'item' parameter represents (e.g., an ID or identifier). The phrase 'one linked Plaid item' suggests the parameter maps to the item to fetch, but this is ambiguous and adds little beyond the schema's bare 'type: string'.

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 the tool fetches a single linked Plaid item and its accounts, using a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('one linked Plaid item'). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_items (plural) and get_balances (which likely returns balances rather than accounts).

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 phrase 'one linked Plaid item' implies a use case for retrieving a specific item rather than listing all items, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide any exclusions. Usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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