list_expenses

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility but fails to disclose behavioral traits such as read-only nature, pagination (despite top/skip parameters), authentication requirements, or any 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 concise with two short sentences, but it sacrifices necessary detail. It could be improved without significant bloat by adding brief guidance on parameters or usage.

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 5 undocumented parameters and no behavioral info, the description is incomplete despite the presence of an output schema. The agent has insufficient context to use the tool effectively.

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 coverage is 0%, yet the description only explains filter_expr, leaving the other four parameters (top, skip, select, orderby) entirely undocumented. The mention of OData filtering is vague without further details on usage.

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 clearly states the tool lists expenses, which is a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate this general list from many sibling tools that list expenses with specific filters (e.g., list_expenses_for_client, list_expenses_for_date_range), leading to ambiguity in purpose.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the numerous specialized list expenses siblings. It only mentions using filter_expr for OData filtering, but does not specify context or exclusions.

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