get_expense_summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It uses 'Get' to imply a read-only operation and specifies the scope ('all expenses'), but does not explicitly confirm no side effects or mention any other behavioral characteristics. This is acceptable for a simple read summary, but could be more transparent.

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, concise sentence that effectively communicates the tool's purpose without unnecessary detail. Every word earns its place, and the structure is optimally front-loaded.

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?

The tool has no parameters, an output schema that presumably documents the return structure, and a simple read-only function. The description fully explains what the tool returns (total summary and category breakdown), making it complete for the intended use case. No additional context is needed.

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 zero parameters, and schema description coverage is trivially 100% since there are no params. The description does not need to add parameter information. Baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, which 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function with a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('total summary and category breakdown of all expenses'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_expenses, which presumably lists individual expenses rather than aggregating them.

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 usage for obtaining aggregated summaries and category breakdowns, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over get_expenses or provide any exclusions. The intended use is reasonably inferred from the phrasing, but no alternative guidance is offered.

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