summarize_expensesSummarize expenses by category with optional date range filtering to see total spending for each category.
Summarize expenses by category, optionally filtered by date range (YYYY-MM-DD).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| end_date | No | ||
| start_date | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does 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 does not explicitly state that this is a read-only query, what the summary output contains, or how empty or unfiltered results behave.
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 efficient sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, with no filler or repetition of the tool name.
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 core purpose is clear and the output schema covers return-value structure, but the lack of usage routing and behavioral transparency leaves meaningful gaps for a tool with no annotations. It is adequate but not fully complete.
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%, so the description must compensate. It meaningfully identifies the two parameters as an optional date range and specifies the YYYY-MM-DD format. It stops short of explaining endpoint edge cases like inclusivity or whether both dates must be provided together.
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: 'Summarize expenses by category'. This makes the aggregation intent clear and separates it from the itemized expense/credit sibling tools, though it does not explicitly name an alternative tool.
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 list_expenses or get_balance. The optional date-range note describes how to filter, but does not provide tool-selection context, exclusions, or alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.