get_settlement_economics

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

The description labels the tool as a 'Read' operation, which implies non-destructive behavior. It lists the economic components, adding context beyond the schema. However, with no annotations, it does not disclose potential behavioral traits like pagination, authorization needs, or data recency limits.

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 a single, focused sentence of 12 words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and included data without unnecessary verbiage.

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?

For a simple read tool with two optional date parameters and no output schema, the description provides an adequate overview. However, it lacks details on return format, pagination, or cumulative vs. daily breakdowns, leaving some gaps for a completely self-contained description.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters (start_date, end_date), so the schema itself already documents them well. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond listing the output fields, earning the baseline score of 3.

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 verb 'Read' and the resource 'settlement-period unit economics', and lists specific components (starting balance, charges, deposits, refunds, reserves). This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on advertising, inventory, or orders.

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 implies this tool is for reading settlement economics, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like get_fee_breakdown or get_profitability. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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