monzo_list_pots

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a notable side effect: 'Also records balance snapshots,' which is beyond the basic listing action. It does not mention auth or rate limits, but the side effect disclosure is valuable for a read-like tool.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line purpose, a concise args section, and a brief return/side-effect note. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

The description covers the essential aspects: what it lists, the parameter, a return summary, and the side effect. Since an output schema exists, detailed return formatting is not required. It lacks edge-case/error handling details, but for a simple list tool this is adequate.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, leaving account_type underdocumented. The description's 'Args' section explicitly defines valid values ('personal' or 'joint') and the default, fully compensating for the schema gap and adding semantic clarity.

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 states 'List all pots (savings buckets) for a Monzo account' with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('pots'), clarified by the parenthetical. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like monzo_list_accounts and monzo_list_transactions.

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 implies when to use the tool (when you need pots) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. It lacks guidance on choosing this over other Monzo tools, so 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.