earn_get_movements_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the tool returns total count, total amounts, and aggregated data, implying a read operation. However, it does not disclose any side effects, authentication needs beyond the optional jwt parameter, or rate limits. The description is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 two sentences: first sentence clearly states purpose and valid values, second describes output. It is front-loaded, no extraneous words, and every sentence adds necessary information.

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 no annotations, the description adequately explains the output (total count, total amounts, aggregated data) but lacks details on output structure (e.g., JSON shape). It also does not provide usage context relative to sibling tools. Overall, it is minimally 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 coverage is 100% with both parameters described. The description adds context beyond the schema by listing valid type values and specifying that the output includes total count, total amounts, and aggregated data. This adds value, elevating from baseline 3.

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 clearly states the tool gets summary statistics of Earn movements filtered by type, with specific verb 'Get', resource 'Earn movements', and includes valid type values. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like earn_get_movements (lists individual movements) and earn_get_summary (overall summary without type filter).

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 implies usage for filtered summary statistics by specifying valid type values, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like earn_get_movements (for detailed movements) or earn_get_summary (for unfiltered summary). No when-not-to-use or alternative tool references are provided.

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