get_aged_payables

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It only states it generates a report, but does not mention that it is read-only, whether it requires specific permissions, what happens to data, or any rate limits. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotation support.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose. No unnecessary words or redundancy. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 report generation tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is too brief. It lacks details on what the report contains, how to interpret results, or any operational context. The two parameters are not explained beyond what is in the schema, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 description does not add any meaning beyond the schema. The schema has descriptions for sub-parameters, but the tool description itself does not explain how to construct the params object or the significance of parameters. Given the context of 50% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 generates an Aged Payables report from QuickBooks Online, showing outstanding vendor bills. The verb 'Generate' and resource 'Aged Payables report' are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like get_aged_receivables.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., get_vendor_balance or get_vendor_expenses). There is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or scenarios where this tool is not appropriate.

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