get_trial_balance

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it only says 'Get the report.' It does not mention that this is likely a read-only operation, how report defaults work, whether date ranges are enforced, or what the returned report structure looks like.

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 single sentence is concise and free of fluff, but it is under-specified for a tool with 9 parameters and no additional context. Conciseness is achieved at the cost of needed substance, so it is not appropriately sized.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description is the sole source of guidance. It fails to address parameter semantics, defaults, selection criteria, or return value expectations, making it inadequate for reliable invocation.

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 only 22%, and the description adds no parameter-level context. The tool has 9 parameters including accountIds, noneZero, showZero, onlyActive, and noneTransactions, but the description does not help the agent understand their meaning or combinations.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Bigcapital trial balance report'), making the core purpose unambiguous. It is clearly distinct from sibling report tools such as get_profit_loss, get_balance_sheet, or get_general_ledger, since 'trial balance' names a unique report type.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternative report tools like get_general_ledger or get_balance_sheet. No use cases, exclusions, or conditions are provided, leaving the agent to infer when this report is appropriate.

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