List money movements

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety and scope are covered. The description adds that each entry conveys amount, source, destination, and time, but says nothing about pagination behavior, ordering, or result size beyond what the params declare. With annotations carrying the safety profile, this is adequate but not rich.

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 short sentences with zero waste; the resource definition comes first and the motivating use case second. Nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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?

An output schema exists and the input schema is fully documented, so return values and parameter details need not be in the description. Purpose and usage are both covered; only minor context such as ordering or how pagination interacts with the month filter is absent.

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%, and the limit/offset/month parameters are fully documented in the schema including enum meanings and defaults. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 ('List') and a specific resource ('history of money assigned and moved between categories'), which cleanly separates it from ledger-oriented siblings like list_transactions and from mutating siblings like assign_money and move_money. The second sentence reinforces what the resource represents rather than restating the name.

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?

Gives an explicit use case: explaining why a category's assigned amount changed. That tells the agent when to reach for it, but it does not name alternatives or exclusions (e.g., use list_transactions for actual bank activity, or assign_money/move_money to change amounts).

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