get_budget_summary

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, consistent with the description's read operation. The description adds context about the backing endpoint (v2 GET /summary) and the returned fields, which is helpful beyond the annotation.

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?

Three sentences, no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value: main action, return fields, optional behavior, and backend info. Front-loaded with core purpose.

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 number of parameters and lack of output schema, the description does well to list return fields and explain optional flags. It is complete enough for a summary tool with good schema documentation.

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?

All 7 parameters have 100% schema coverage with detailed descriptions in the input schema. The tool description adds minimal extra meaning (e.g., mentioning alignment), but schema already does most of the work. Score reflects high schema coverage.

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 it gets a budget summary for a date range, listing specific fields like per-category totals and optional include_occurrences for per-period breakdown. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_budget_settings or upsert_budget by focusing on summary retrieval.

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 using include_occurrences for per-period breakdown matching budget periodicity, giving clear context. It does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, but the guidance is sufficient for common use.

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