getMoneyMovementGroups

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only restates the basic function and does not reveal anything about ordering, aggregation, pagination, plan scoping, or relationship to money movements. An agent gets no behavioral context beyond the literal 'returns all' statement.

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 short sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the core functionality, though it may be too terse to convey useful nuances. It earns a high score for concise structure but loses a point for extreme brevity at the expense of context.

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 existence of closely related sibling tools like getMoneyMovements and getMoneyMovementGroupsByMonth, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what a money movement group is, whether the result is plan-scoped, or how it differs from the month-specific variant. The output schema and parameter schema help, but the description alone leaves an agent uncertain about correct tool selection.

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%, and the plan_id parameter is well documented, including special values like 'last-used' and 'default'. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Returns all money movement groups.' It is clear that the tool lists the full set of money movement groups, which distinguishes it implicitly from the by-month variant. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like getMoneyMovements or getMoneyMovementGroupsByMonth.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as getMoneyMovementGroupsByMonth or getMoneyMovements. The description does not mention any conditions, exclusions, or scenarios where a sibling would be more appropriate.

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