monzo_search_transactions

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: it searches cached data, performs case-insensitive partial matches, and auto-syncs if the cache is stale. This is critical for a search tool that may trigger a sync. Could add pagination details but overall good.

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 brief with two introductory sentences and a clear argument list. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is front-loaded with purpose and behavior.

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 output schema exists, the description covers almost all user-facing aspects: search behavior, auto-sync, parameter meanings. It could mention error conditions or cache age details, but is largely 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?

The description adds complete parameter documentation for all 5 parameters, including allowed values (account_type: personal/joint), date format and inclusivity, and default/limit for limit. This compensates fully for the 0% schema coverage.

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 searches cached transactions by merchant name, description, or notes, with auto-sync on stale cache. This distinguishes it from siblings like monzo_list_transactions (list without search) and monzo_sync (sync only).

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 use for searching cached transactions but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance. Usage is implied through the verb and resource.

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