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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly=true, destructive=false, openWorld=true). The description goes beyond them by disclosing sort order (newest first), per-expense currency, home-currency totals, and an auth prerequisite (Cotlet API key with app access), which is genuinely useful 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?

Front-loaded and generally tight, with the resource/return summary before the auth note. The opening fragment 'Trip expenses with amount, currency...' slightly overlaps with the following sentence, but no sentence is wasted.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so reasonably: it names the fields, sort order, and currency semantics. Combined with the auth requirement, an agent has enough to call it correctly, though pagination behavior is unstated.

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 100% and both parameters are documented there, so the schema carries the load. The description mentions 'category' as a field but does not explain the category filter parameter (e.g. exact-match vs substring), adding no meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb and resource (list trip expenses) and enumerates the returned fields (amount, currency, category, date, plus totals). It is clearly the read counterpart to wanderlog_add_expense, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is merely implied: an agent can infer you call this to retrieve a trip's expenses. There is no explicit when-to-use, no exclusion (e.g. filtering vs full listing), and no pointer to alternatives like wanderlog_list_trips or wanderlog_add_expense.

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