get_hard_cost_expense_lookups

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states 'Fails loudly,' implying errors are conspicuous, but does not describe success behavior, return format, or side effects. This is insufficient for a tool with no other behavioral hints.

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 extremely short (two fragments), which sacrifices informativeness for brevity. While concise, it omits essential details, making it under-specified rather than efficiently compact.

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?

Despite having an output schema and one optional parameter, the description fails to provide sufficient context. It does not specify what lookups are returned, how they differ from other get_*_lookups tools, or how 'fails loudly' affects usage. The tool requires more context to be complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no meaning to the sole parameter 'matter_id.' The description does not explain its purpose, format, or effect, leaving the agent without context beyond the schema's type and optionality.

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 specifies 'Hard-cost-expense lookups' indicating a specific resource for hard-cost expenses, distinguishing it from other expense lookups like get_expense_lookups. However, it lacks a clear verb (e.g., retrieve, list) and the phrase '[Not in LCS /v1]' is unclear, making the purpose somewhat vague.

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 alternatives. The description mentions 'Fails loudly' but does not indicate typical use cases, prerequisites, or when not to use it.

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