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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description does not need to repeat safety details. It adds useful behavioral context: budget amounts are visible only to users with docket visibility, and monthly budgets count the current month.

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 core purpose and then adds visibility and monthly-budget caveats. It is appropriately sized with little waste, though the phrasing could be slightly tighter.

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 analytical tool with no output schema and complete parameter documentation, the description gives enough context about what is returned: budget usage percentages, over-budget flags, visibility rules, and monthly handling. It could more explicitly describe the response shape, but the key concepts are covered.

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%, so the parameters are already well documented. The description adds meaning to the over-budget threshold (more than 100% used) and clarifies that customer filtering can cover all customers by default, but it does not elaborate on include_finished beyond the 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 this is a budget overview of projects, including budget usage and over-budget status. It is specific enough to distinguish from generic project search, though it does not explicitly name sibling tools like financial_summary or search_projects.

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 implied: fetch budget overviews, optionally for one customer, and optionally filter to over-budget projects. However, it does not state when to use this instead of related tools such as financial_summary or search_projects.

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