get_total_spend_all_sources

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

No annotations, but description discloses it returns a grand total number across all sources. It does not detail aggregation behavior, date range handling, or potential latency. Simple read operation, so minimal disclosure needed, but could be more explicit.

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?

Description is extremely concise with one sentence of purpose and three example questions. Every word adds value; no fluff. Front-loaded with key 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?

For a simple tool with no output schema and only two optional parameters, the description covers the main purpose and scope. It would benefit from explaining how date parameters work, but overall is adequate for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 description does not mention the two optional parameters (start_date, end_date). Examples imply date filtering but do not explain how parameters affect results. The description should describe the date range behavior.

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?

Description clearly states it returns the grand total spend across all connected sources (cloud + SaaS), with specific verb 'get' and resource 'total spend all sources'. Examples reinforce the scope. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_saas_spend_summary (SaaS only) or get_cost_summary (likely subset).

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?

Examples provide clear use cases (e.g., 'total tech spend this month') that help the agent decide when to use this tool. However, does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, though the sibling list offers differentiation.

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