export_board_summary

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

No annotations, but description discloses data handling (built locally, doesn't hold data, reads billing APIs) and privacy guarantees. Does not explicitly state it's read-only, but the description implies no destructive side effects.

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?

Structured in three clear paragraphs: purpose, data sources/privacy, examples. Front-loaded with primary action. Could be slightly more concise, but all sentences add value and the examples are helpful.

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?

Covers purpose, dependencies, and output format (markdown). Missing explanation of the single parameter and details on exact output contents. Adequate for a straightforward generation tool, but could be more complete regarding expected output structure.

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 0%, and the description does not explain the only parameter 'period_days' (default 30). The agent cannot infer that this controls the time horizon. The description adds no semantic value beyond the schema's name.

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?

Clearly states it generates a cost section of a board/investor update as markdown, specifying the resource, output format, and domains covered. Distinguishes from sibling cost tools by its specific board-ready, unit-economics focus.

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?

Provides context on when to use: for board-ready cost summaries, with examples. Mentions a prerequisite (set_business_metrics). Lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the examples and requirement provide adequate guidance.

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