finance_qoe_working_capital

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only mentions routing through a dispatcher and scope, but does not reveal whether the action is read-only, destructive, requires permissions, or has side effects.

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 very short but achieves this by omitting essential information. The technical routing detail about JWT and dispatcher is not helpful for an AI agent deciding whether to use this 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?

Although an output schema exists, the description does not mention return values or expected outcomes. Given the complexity of finance working capital analysis and many similar siblings, the description fails to provide sufficient context for accurate tool selection.

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 schema coverage is 0%, yet the description only duplicates schema field names. 'message' is described as 'Free-text objective' and 'inputs' as 'Optional JSON string of structured inputs', adding no substantive meaning or constraints 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 states 'Run the finance domain agent action finance_qoe_working_capital', which is a tautology that does not explain what the action accomplishes. No verb or resource is defined beyond the tool name itself. It fails to distinguish this tool from sibling finance tools like finance_working_capital_efficiency.

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 other finance tools. The description lacks any context about use cases, prerequisites, or scenarios where this action is appropriate.

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