analyze_expense_type

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

No annotations provided. Description says 'analyze' and 'suggest', implying a read-only operation, but does not disclose authentication needs, potential side effects, or behavior with ambiguous input. With no annotations, the description should provide more behavioral context.

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?

Single sentence with no wasted words. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 low complexity and full schema coverage, the description does not explain the output format. It mentions suggesting 'expense type and account item' but does not clarify if these are returned as separate fields or how the suggestion is presented, which is crucial since there is no output schema.

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 has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'description', already described as 'Expense description (from receipt or user input)'. The tool description adds no further meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the tool analyzes an expense description to suggest the most appropriate expense type and account item. This is a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like 'suggest_company' and 'suggest_common_expenses'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'suggest_common_expenses' or 'list_expense_templates'. The description implies classification use, but lacks explicit context or exclusions.

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