get_liabilities

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Fetch', implying a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm safety, mention authentication/consent requirements, or describe any side effects or limitations. The reference to the Plaid command adds implementation context but not behavioral 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?

A single sentence with no redundant words. The verb is front-loaded and the description is easily scannable.

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 adequately conveys the tool's purpose for a simple read operation, but lacks detail about the returned liability details, any pagination or limits, or how it differs from related tools. Given no output schema, a bit more detail would improve 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?

The schema has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics, but the tool requires no input, and the mention of `--all` suggests it retrieves all liabilities by default, which aligns with the empty 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 uses a specific verb 'Fetch' and a clear resource 'credit/loan liability details', distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_balances or get_transactions. The phrase 'via `plaid liabilities --all`' reinforces the scope.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it does, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name. There is no mention of exclusions or alternative tools.

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