list_income

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

The annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to restate that. It adds minor behavioral context (sorting example, summary behavior) but does not disclose any additional traits like authentication needs or rate limits.

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 extremely concise at two short sentences, front-loading the core distinction and key parameter usage. Every sentence adds essential value without redundancy.

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?

Despite having a complex input schema (10 parameters) and no schema descriptions, the description does not explain the purpose of parameters like initial_date, end_date, customer, tags, min_total_limit, max_total_limit, page, page_size, or the output schema. It leaves the agent with incomplete information for tool invocation.

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?

With 0% schema coverage for 10 parameters, the description only explains two parameters (sort and summary). It provides some semantic value but fails to cover the remaining eight parameters, leaving significant gaps.

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 explicitly states 'Lista ingresos (no facturas)' which clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'list_invoices'. It also includes a sorting example, making the purpose specific and clear.

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 provides a sorting example and explains the summary parameter. The phrase 'no facturas' implicitly guides the agent to use this tool for incomes instead of invoices, but it lacks explicit when-not scenarios.

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