get_expenses

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It merely states 'Get a list of expenses' without explaining that filtering is optional, whether the result is paginated, or any access requirements. The behavior is minimally transparent but lacks useful context beyond the action itself.

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 sentence that effectively communicates the core function. It contains no filler, is immediately clear, and is appropriately sized for a simple read tool.

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's simplicity and full schema coverage, the description is mostly adequate. However, it lacks any mention of optional filters or how the result relates to get_summary, leaving some contextual gaps. It does not need to explain return values since no output schema exists, but more behavioral detail would improve completeness.

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%, meaning each parameter (year, month, category) already has a description. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics. Baseline of 3 is appropriate given the schema fully documents the parameters.

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 'Get a list of expenses' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating the tool's purpose. It is distinguishable from siblings add_expense, delete_expense, and get_summary, as it focuses on listing expenses rather than modifying or summarizing them.

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 mention scenarios where get_expenses is preferred over get_summary, nor does it note any prerequisites or limitations. There is no explicit context or exclusions.

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