get_finance_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It explicitly states 'read-only,' which informs the agent that the tool does not modify state. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as rate limiting, authentication needs, or default behavior when called without parameters.

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 of 13 words, front-loading the purpose ('Return read-only finance status') and listing key output items. Every word adds value, with no fluff or redundancy.

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 four optional parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain parameter usage or output structure beyond a brief list. The agent lacks sufficient context to use the tool effectively, especially for parameterized queries.

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 0%, and the description does not mention any of the four parameters (windows, db_path, working_account_id, start_date). The agent receives no guidance on the meaning, format, or effect of parameters, leaving a critical gap in usability.

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 returns read-only finance status and lists specific items (balances, source freshness, trace ids, stable V1 slots). It distinguishes the tool as a read-only status retrieval but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, such as other 'get' tools or list tools.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not specify expected use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions. The user is left without context to choose between this and the many sibling tools (e.g., list_finance_memories, get_daily_digest).

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