Accounting report

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safe-read nature is covered. The description adds no significant behavioral disclosures beyond what annotations and schema provide, such as default output format (already in schema) or response shape.

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 three short sentences with the purpose front-loaded, making it easy to scan. 'Defaults to JSON' is slightly redundant with the schema but not harmful; overall it is concise and structured well.

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 all seven parameters fully documented in the schema and safe-read annotations, the description provides adequate high-level context for a report tool. It defines the return value (accounting report) and available modes, though it does not detail output shape or edge cases, which is acceptable given schema richness.

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 the description need not repeat parameter details. It names several parameter families (view, columns, navigation, period, subdivision) but adds no meaning beyond the schema's full descriptions.

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 returns an 'accounting report (enhanced balance sheet / P&L) for a document', with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like banana_balance by calling out 'enhanced balance sheet / P&L', though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 the tool is for retrieving an accounting report and mentions supported options (view, columns, navigation, period, subdivision), giving some usage context. However, it does not state when to use this over sibling reporting tools or provide any exclusions or alternative guidance.

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