Collect earnings now

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

Adds behavior the annotations don't capture: the call is asynchronous, fires all providers, returns immediately with no data. That's the critical trait an agent needs to avoid treating an empty response as failure. It doesn't mention provider failure handling or how long a full collection typically takes, which keeps it below a 5.

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 tight sentences, effect first, async caveat and follow-up path second. Every clause earns its place and nothing is repeated from annotations or schema.

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 must explain what comes back, and it does: nothing immediately, results later via get_earnings_summary or get_collector_alerts. Combined with the annotations covering safety and idempotency, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret this tool correctly.

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?

Zero parameters, so there is nothing to disambiguate and the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly doesn't waste words on parameter details.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Start an earnings collection now') and explains the concrete effect: CashPilot asks every provider for current balances. It also distinguishes itself from the read siblings get_earnings_summary and get_collector_alerts by casting them as follow-up reads.

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?

Clear usage context: call this to kick off a collection, then read results a minute later via the named siblings. It doesn't state explicit exclusions or when not to call it, but the idempotent annotation plus the 'returns at once, read later' framing leaves little ambiguity.

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