getMonthCategoryById

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that amounts (assigned, activity, available) are specific to the current plan month in UTC, adding behavioral context beyond the schema. However, it does not mention other traits like read-only nature, pagination, rate limits, or response structure, leaving gaps.

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 extremely concise—two sentences with zero wasted words. It front-loads the main action ('Returns a single category for a specific plan month') and adds a critical qualifier in the second sentence. Ideal length for a simple retrieval tool.

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?

Given no output schema, the description should provide more context on the return structure (e.g., fields like id, name, budgeted amounts, etc.). It mentions 'amounts' but does not list them fully or describe the response object shape. For a tool with 3 required params and a specific use case, the description leaves the agent guessing about the exact response format.

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?

The input schema already has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all three parameters. The tool description adds value by explaining that amounts returned are specific to the month, which is not explicitly stated in the schema's month parameter description (which focuses on format). This clarifies the semantic meaning of the month parameter's effect on the output.

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 it returns a single category for a specific plan month, using a specific verb 'Returns' and resource 'category for a specific plan month'. It is distinct from getCategories (which returns all categories) and getCategoryById (which likely returns category without month context), but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like getPlanMonth.

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 use when needing a single category's data for a given month (e.g., amounts specific to UTC month), but offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like getCategoryById (no month context) or getPlanMonth (entire month data). No exclusions or alternatives mentioned.

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