plaid-mcp

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 that the tool lists accounts from a local cache, which is useful behavioral context about data freshness. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or error handling, leaving gaps for a tool with no annotation support.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the key action and scope without any wasted words. It directly communicates the tool's purpose and data source, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 tool has no parameters, an output schema exists, and no annotations, the description is reasonably complete for a simple listing operation. It specifies the scope ('every account across every linked institution') and data source ('local cache'), though it could benefit from mentioning output format or caching implications for full 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 tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents the inputs. The description adds no parameter-specific information, but this is acceptable as there are no parameters to describe, aligning with the baseline for zero parameters.

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 action ('List every account') and resource ('across every linked institution'), specifying it operates on data from the local cache. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_balances_tool or get_holdings_tool, which focus on specific data types rather than a comprehensive account listing.

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 usage when a broad overview of all accounts is needed, but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like list_linked_institutions_tool or get_balances_tool. It provides clear context by mentioning 'from the local cache', which suggests it retrieves cached data rather than real-time updates.

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