kdy_list_expense

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral disclosure. It discloses the read-only nature and a critical uncertainty (endpoint may return 404). However, it does not mention response format, pagination behavior, or other operational details that an agent might need.

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 two sentences that each serve a purpose: one states functionality, the other adds a crucial warning. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and is free of redundancy, though it could be slightly more informative without sacrificing brevity.

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 simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description should explain the parameters and expected return, but it does not. The warning about 404 is helpful, but the lack of parameter semantics makes the description incomplete 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?

The schema defines page and size with defaults but no descriptions. The tool description does not explain these parameters at all. With 0% schema coverage, the description should compensate but fails to do so, leaving the agent to guess that these are pagination controls.

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 action (query) and the resource (expense report list), and explicitly marks it as read-only. While it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools, the name and resource are distinct enough for an agent to identify its 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 mentions 'read-only' implying it is safe for queries, but it does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives or any prerequisites. The warning about potential 404 errors is useful context but does not guide selection decisions.

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