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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses the live nature and source of truth, but does not mention potential issues (e.g., Xero integration dependency, rate limits, latency) or the output format. Some transparency is present but insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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 front-loaded with the key action and details in the first sentence. However, the second paragraph ('Routing: ...') largely restates the first paragraph, introducing redundancy. It is still relatively concise but could be trimmed.

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 effectively covers purpose and usage differentiation, but omits important context such as the output format (no output schema), error handling, and prerequisites (Xero integration). For a simple read tool, this is adequate but not 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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description only lists the report types and implies date parameters, but adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter. No additional syntax or usage nuances are given.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'LIVE financial report straight from the company's connected Xero ledger', listing specific report types (ProfitAndLoss, BalanceSheet, etc.). It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling get_financial_summary by noting this tool provides live data while the sibling uses a periodic snapshot.

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 states when to use this tool ('when the user asks about current/live financial position') and when not to (prefer get_financial_summary for processed snapshots). Provides clear routing guidance: 'use over get_financial_summary for current numbers'.

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