get_all_card_expenses

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'pagination and filtering support', which hints at large-scale data handling, but fails to describe critical behaviors like rate limits, authentication needs, response format, error conditions, or whether this is a read-only operation. For a tool with 7 parameters and no annotations, this is inadequate.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Get all Brex card expenses') and adds key features ('with pagination and filtering support'). Every word earns its place with zero waste, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 the tool's complexity (7 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return values, error handling, pagination mechanics, and behavioral constraints. For a data retrieval tool with filtering and pagination, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all 7 parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific semantics beyond mentioning 'filtering support' generically, which doesn't enhance understanding of individual parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does all the work.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'all Brex card expenses', making the purpose evident. It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_expenses' by specifying 'card expenses' and mentions 'pagination and filtering support' which adds specificity. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'get_all_expenses' which might be similar.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_expenses' or 'get_all_expenses'. It mentions 'pagination and filtering support' which implies usage for bulk retrieval with filters, but offers no explicit when/when-not instructions or named alternatives, leaving the agent to guess.

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