get_contract_to_cash_cash_collection

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

The description reinforces the read-only nature with 'Read' and 'immutable', which aligns with the annotations (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true). However, it does not add new behavioral details such as error conditions, side effects, or rate limits beyond what annotations already declare.

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, short sentence with no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise and places the primary action ('Read') first, providing good structure for the limited content.

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 simple tool, the description lacks sufficient context to understand what 'collected-cash custody' refers to, how the parameters relate to the operation, or when to choose this tool over related get_* tools. The lack of output schema and parameter details makes it incomplete for confident agent 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?

The schema lists three parameters (record_id, company_ref, project_ref) with no descriptions, and the tool description offers no explanation of their meaning or how they are used. Schema coverage is 0%, and the description does not compensate.

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 'Read' indicating a retrieval operation, but the object 'exact immutable collected-cash custody' is cryptic and does not clearly define what the tool returns. It is more specific than a generic 'get' but still 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 the many similar get_* sibling tools. There is no mention of alternatives, prerequisites, or typical scenarios.

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