List Budget Detail Columns

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the description does not need to repeat safety info. It adds value by describing pagination behavior (page and per_page) and that the response includes pagination metadata. It also mentions the endpoint. No contradictions with annotations.

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 concise with 4-5 sentences, front-loading the purpose and then adding usage guidance, pagination details, required parameters, and API info. Every sentence serves a purpose, and the structure is logical with no redundancy.

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 the lack of an output schema, the description partially compensates by explaining the relationship to the List Budget Details API and pagination. However, it does not describe the structure of the returned column objects beyond mentioning the ID field. The mention of 'Budget records' is vague and inconsistent with the tool's stated purpose of listing columns. Additional detail about the response fields would improve completeness.

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 100%, so all parameters have descriptions. The description adds context by noting that budget_view_id is a URL path parameter and project_id is a query string parameter. Additionally, it explains that the ID field of each column will appear as keys in rows from another API, which adds semantic meaning to the return values beyond the schema.

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 returns a list of columns for a Budget View, and explains the relationship to the List Budget Details API. However, there is a slight inconsistency: it first says 'list of columns' but later says 'returns a paginated JSON array of Budget records', which could confuse the agent about what exactly is returned. Still, the core purpose is clear and specific.

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 guidance on when to use the tool: 'Use this to enumerate Budget records when you need a paginated overview, to find IDs, or to filter by query parameters.' It also lists required parameters. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or suggest alternative tools, which would help with decision-making among many sibling tools.

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