freshbooks_list_expenses

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint), yet the description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: newest-first ordering by default and the caveat that a reported total may include records the identity cannot read, surfaced in a `note` field instead of a silent empty result. That preempts a real misdiagnosis, though pagination mechanics themselves are only asserted, not described.

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?

Three sentences, all load-bearing: the core operation leads, the filter capability follows, and the counter-intuitive count caveat closes. No restatement of the tool name or filler.

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 must gesture at the return shape; it covers ordering and the anomalous total-vs-rows case via the `note` field, which is the highest-risk return behavior. Remaining gaps (record shape, pagination response envelope) are minor for a list endpoint.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It compensates for the trickiest parameter by documenting the open-ended `search` object and its filter syntax with an example, but says nothing about `page` or `per_page` semantics (defaults, page size behavior) beyond the bare word "pagination".

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 and resource ("List expenses for the account") plus the default ordering, which immediately distinguishes it from freshbooks_get_expense, freshbooks_create_expense and freshbooks_list_expense_categories in the sibling set. An agent can route to it without opening the schema.

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?

It explains that raw FreshBooks filters are supported and gives a concrete filter example, which implies the filtering use case, but it never states when to prefer this over a single-record fetch or when filtering is unnecessary. No explicit when-not guidance or named alternative.

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