convert_bank_statement

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

With no annotations, the description discloses cost per page, async behavior, and polling details. However, it does not cover potential errors, file size limits, or what happens if the file is invalid.

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?

Three concise sentences, no unnecessary words, front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return value (conversion id) and the follow-up actions. It lacks details on error handling or file limitations, but covers the key workflow adequately for a low-complexity tool.

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 already describes both parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds context about 'downloadable' and cost per page, but the cost is more of a behavioral note than parameter semantics. Minimal added value beyond 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 it converts a PDF bank statement with CapyParse, specifying the input options (file_path or file_url). It distinguishes from sibling tools by outlining the asynchronous workflow with polling and result retrieval.

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?

Explicitly instructs to pass a local file_path or downloadable file_url, mentions cost (1 credit per page), and provides a step-by-step process: returns conversion id, poll get_conversion until completed, then call get_conversion_result. The typical polling time and wait interval are given.

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