List expenses

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

The description adds the paid plan requirement, which is useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. However, no other behaviors (e.g., pagination, filtering, response format) are disclosed.

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 very short with two fragments, but it is under-specified rather than effectively concise. The first sentence is a noun phrase that could be clearer, and the second is a note. It is easy to read but fails to provide necessary substance.

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 tool has no output schema and six optional parameters, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what the response looks like, mention pagination or filtering capabilities (which are in the schema), or provide any use-case context. The description is incomplete for a moderately complex list tool.

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 six parameters have descriptions in the schema, providing 100% coverage. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, so the baseline of 3 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 lacks a verb, using only a noun phrase 'Expenses recorded in the workspace.' It does not explicitly state that the tool lists expenses, relying on the title for the action. It also does not distinguish this tool from other list tools like list_time_entries or list_projects.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only extra information is the paid plan requirement, which is a prerequisite rather than usage context. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned.

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