Get Current Period Summary

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, so the description is not required to restate safety. It adds return-field names (periodStart, totalAmount, etc.), but doesn't add behavioral context like timezone, auth constraints, or error behavior beyond what annotations provide.

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 short and front-loaded with the core purpose, and the Returns line adds value because no output schema exists. The Args block is somewhat redundant against the input schema but not verbose enough to be a serious problem.

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, two-parameter tool with strong annotations and a return-format note, the description together with the schema covers everything needed to call it. The only missing piece is explicit sibling differentiation, which is already penalized under usage guidelines.

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 covers 100% of parameters with descriptions and enums. The description's Args section repeats those same allowed values and defaults without adding meaning 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 names a specific verb and resource ('Get spending summary for a preset period') and lists four concrete presets. It does not explicitly contrast with same-domain siblings, but the preset scoping is enough to identify the tool's purpose.

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?

There is no 'when to use' guidance, nor any comparison with siblings like ogarniai_get_weekly_summary or ogarniai_get_summary_by_period. The reader must infer the right choice from tool names and enum values.

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