monzo_search_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 discloses caching behavior, case-insensitive partial matching, fields searched, and default limit. It does not mention authorization or rate limits, but the core behavioral traits are covered.

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 efficiently structured with a brief overview followed by a clear args list. Every sentence adds value (caching behavior, match type, field scope, defaults). No wasted words while being informative.

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 that an output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers search behavior, caching, date handling, and defaults, providing all necessary context for an agent to use this tool correctly.

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%, yet the description explains all 5 parameters: query (search term with match details), account_type (personal/joint default all), since (ISO start inclusive), before (ISO end exclusive), limit (default 30). This adds significant meaning beyond the raw schema.

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, differentiating it from sibling tools like list_transactions (which lists all transactions) and sync (which syncs data).

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?

While the description implies usage for searching vs listing, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like monzo_list_transactions or monzo_spending. The auto-sync behavior is mentioned but not as a clear condition.

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