Generate Settlement (Deprecated)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the output is Merkle-committed and signed, which is useful artifact-level context, but says nothing about determinism, auth requirements, or persistence. 'Generate ... record' versus readOnlyHint=true is a mild tension, though generating a derived record returned to the caller is plausibly non-mutating, so it is not a hard contradiction.

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?

A single sentence with the deprecation warning front-loaded in brackets before the functional statement. Zero filler; every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description should carry the return-artifact burden, and it does so minimally ('Merkle-committed, signed settlement record'). For a deprecated tool, the most important context — the replacement path — is present, so the definition is close to 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% — startDate, endDate, and periodLabel are each documented in the schema, including the label format examples. The description adds nothing beyond the vague phrase 'for a period', so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb, resource, and scope: 'Generate a Merkle-committed, signed settlement record for a period.' An agent can tell what artifact is produced, though it does not differentiate itself from sibling settlement tools such as aps_aggregate_settlement or aps_verify_settlement.

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 bracketed '[deprecated in v3.0.0, use the gateway.aeoess.com REST API]' is a genuine routing signal — it tells the agent to prefer another mechanism — but gives no condition under which the deprecated tool is still appropriate and does not point to any sibling tool as an alternative.

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