Get Subaccount Transfer Records

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

With no annotations, the description compensates by disclosing time-window limits and default behavior, as well as authentication requirements. It does not explain pagination semantics or response structure, but those are partly covered by the schema and sibling context.

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 concise: three sentences with no fluff. It leads with the primary purpose, then adds essential constraints and environmental prerequisites. Every sentence carries useful information.

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?

For a read-only list tool with 10 parameters and no required inputs, the description gives the key context: scope, time constraints, and auth. It does not mention output shape, but no output schema exists and the purpose makes the return type inferable. A brief note on pagination behavior would have made it 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?

Schema coverage is 90%, so the parameters are largely self-documenting. The description adds generic 'optional filters' but does not elaborate on individual parameter meanings or edge cases. This meets the baseline for high 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 'Fetch[s] transfer records among accounts in the account group,' which specifies both the action and the resource. This distinguishes it from the sibling `get_transfer_records` by emphasizing the subaccount/account-group 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?

The description provides concrete usage context: it mentions optional filters, the maximum 6-month interval, and the default 7-day window when no times are given. It also notes the required environment variables. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools like `get_transfer_records`.

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