create_bank_account

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden; it does disclose that this persists a real account ('real', 'WRITE') and that the body is passed verbatim without validation or transformation. It omits permissions/auth requirements, what the response contains (e.g., created ID), and error behavior, which matter for a mutation endpoint.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the WRITE marker, with a documentation pointer instead of bloated prose. Slight redundancy between the description and the schema's 'sent verbatim as body' wording keeps it from a 5.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an unconstrained nested payload, the external reference link is the right compensation for field-level detail. Still missing is any statement of what a successful call returns or what failure looks like, which leaves the agent guessing about verification after the call.

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 100% and the nested `data` object is intentionally opaque, so baseline is a 3. The description reinforces 'sent verbatim as the request body' but largely repeats the schema text; the added value is the external API reference where the payload shape is actually documented.

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 and resource ('creates a real treasury bank account in Holded') and flags the write nature up front. It does not, however, differentiate itself from the sibling create_treasury, which an agent could reasonably confuse with it.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus create_treasury, update_bank_account, or the other creation tools in the family, and no prerequisite or verification guidance. The 'WRITE:' prefix signals impact but not routing.

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