summarize

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns pre-computed totals rather than raw transactions, clarifies that group_by controls the aggregation dimension, and explains that from_date/to_date override period. This is meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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?

Two compact sentences deliver the core purpose and parameter guidance with zero filler. The most important directive is front-loaded, and the parameter constraints are clearly separated into readable lines.

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 tool has an output schema, so return-value documentation is not required. The description covers the key behavioral and parameter context needed to invoke it correctly. Minor gaps like date formatting and explicit alternatives are acceptable but keep it from a perfect score.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It enumerates the valid values for group_by and period and explains the override relationship with from_date/to_date. It does not specify the expected date format, but the essential parameter semantics are provided.

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 identifies the tool as returning spending totals that are pre-computed, with a strong directive to use it instead of manually summing expenses. It is distinct from the sibling query/search tools, though it does not explicitly name them.

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?

It gives an explicit usage rule: 'Never sum expenses by hand — call this.' This tells the agent when to reach for it, though it does not explicitly describe when to prefer query_expenses or search_expenses instead.

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