push_weekly_insight

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it covers week-over-week spend change, top cost movers, open savings pipeline, anomalies, budget alerts, and a recommended action. It labels the output as a 'proactive format, an analyst briefing.' It doesn't mention error or empty-data cases, but for a zero-parameter push tool, this is adequate transparency.

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 about six sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, followed by content overview, timing contrast, and examples. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or fluff.

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 zero parameters, no output schema, and the tool's simplicity, the description fully covers what the tool does, when to use it, and what the output includes. No additional information is necessary.

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?

The input schema has zero parameters with 100% coverage trivially. The description does not add parameter details because none exist; the baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The content implicitly confirms no configuration is needed.

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 pushes a 'weekly cost intelligence summary to Slack right now,' specifying the verb, resource, target, and timing. It distinguishes itself from the automated Monday morning run, and the sibling tools list includes 'send_digest_now' and 'send_weekly_digest_now,' making the purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly says 'Runs automatically every Monday morning when scheduled. Use this to trigger it on demand,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. It also contrasts with 'metric dump,' implying alternative tools. No explicit 'when not to use' is needed given the clear on-demand context.

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