download_finance_report

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

Annotations only cover readOnlyHint and openWorldHint; the description adds genuinely new behavioral detail by disclosing the return shape — parsed TSV rows with Total_* trailer lines delivered in a separate summary object rather than in rows. That is exactly the kind of nuance the annotations cannot convey, though it says nothing about rate limits or error behavior.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler; the core action is front-loaded and the return-shape caveat follows. Every clause carries 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?

With no output schema, the description usefully explains the split between row data and the summary object, covering the main return ambiguity. It stops short of clarifying the FINANCIAL vs FINANCE_DETAIL distinction or the inline limit default, but those live in the schema.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all five parameters are already documented, establishing a baseline of 3. The description implies region scoping and hints at report type content ("proceeds and adjustments") but adds no format, default, or enum guidance beyond the schema.

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+resource ("Download a financial report") and narrows the scope with the parenthetical content and region qualifier. It is distinguishable from download_sales_report by the report content and region dimension, but it never names that sibling explicitly, so differentiation relies on inference.

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 implied by the scope ("for a region") and required params, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when to prefer this over download_sales_report, and no stated prerequisites such as vendor-number availability.

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