xero_budget_summary_report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states it routes under JWT/tenant/company scope, which is generic and not specific to this tool. It does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, requires special permissions, or what happens when called (e.g., does it return a report object?).

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 (3 sentences) but wastes the first sentence repeating the tool name and routing path. It could be more concise and front-loaded with functional purpose.

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 explain what the report contains (e.g., budget vs actual, date range?). For a report tool, this is insufficient for an agent to determine if it meets the user's need.

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 single parameter 'arguments' is described only as 'JSON string of arguments for the connector operation.' With 0% schema description coverage, the description should specify expected keys or format. This adds no meaningful guidance beyond the schema's type info.

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 merely restates the tool name as 'budget_summary_report' and adds generic routing details (JWT, tenant, company scope). It fails to state what a budget summary report is (e.g., comparison of budget vs actuals), making it vague and indistinguishable from sibling report tools like xero_balance_sheet_report.

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 Xero report tools (e.g., profit/loss, cash flow). There are no exclusions, alternatives, or contextual hints for an agent to decide.

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