finance_goal_plan

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It mentions routing and authentication scope but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, destructive, or has side effects. Key behavioral traits are missing.

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 action name. It uses a clear bullet format for arguments. While it could include more information, it wastes no words.

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?

Despite the tool's complexity (many sibling tools, no annotations, existing output schema), the description omits the tool's domain purpose, return values, and behavioral details. It is insufficient for an agent to confidently select and use this tool.

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 adds basic semantics to the parameters: 'message' is a free-text objective and 'inputs' is an optional JSON string. This clarifies their roles beyond the schema, but lacks examples or constraints. Given 0% schema coverage, this is adequate but not exemplary.

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 states it runs the finance domain agent action 'goal_plan,' but does not explain what 'goal_plan' accomplishes or how it differs from sibling tools like finance_goal_understand or finance_goal_replan. The purpose is technically clear but domain-ambiguous.

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., other finance_goal_* tools). There is no context about prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess the appropriate scenario.

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