读取预算

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description usefully adds the returned data shape, which annotations cannot convey, but says nothing about scope (per-user vs global), pagination, or what an empty budget returns.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the parenthetical payload description is compact. Slightly dense packing of return-shape into the purpose sentence keeps it off a 5.

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?

With no output schema, the description must shoulder the return-value burden and it only partly does: the map shape is given, but whether one month or all months is returned, and behavior when no budget exists, are unspecified.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The YYYY-MM key format mentioned actually clarifies the returned data rather than an input, which is a small bonus but not input-semantics work.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('读取预算文档') and even sketches the document shape (key=YYYY-MM, value=monthly amount). It is distinguishable from the sibling budget.save, though it does not name that alternative explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied by the get/save pairing with budget.save and by the zero-parameter schema. There is no explicit statement of when to call this versus saving or listing, and no mention of prerequisites.

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