Budget Clear Budget

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description's 'This may delete, clear, reset, or otherwise remove data' merely restates that safety profile. The description does not add useful context such as whether data is irrecoverable, whether a confirmation is required, or the scope of the deletion (single month vs. entire budget). The word 'may' introduces unnecessary uncertainty.

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 text is short at two sentences, but the first sentence is a tautology of the tool name and the second is a vague, hedged warning. Neither sentence earns its place by conveying useful, non-obvious information. The structure is sparse rather than concise.

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?

For a destructive tool with a confirm flag, a required month, and multiple similar budget-related siblings, the description is significantly incomplete. It does not explain the effect on budget data, the meaning of the month parameter, why confirm is needed, or how it differs from budget_reset_budget. The absence of an output schema means the description carries more burden, which it fails to meet.

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 50%, leaving required parameter 'month' and important parameter 'confirm' undocumented. The tool description mentions no parameters at all, so an agent receives no help understanding what 'month' refers to or how the destructive operation is gated by confirm. The schema documents 'fields' and 'output_mode', but the description does nothing to compensate for the uncovered parameters.

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's first sentence 'Clear budget' essentially restates the tool name and title, adding no new information. The second sentence 'This may delete, clear, reset, or otherwise remove data' is hedged and vague, failing to specify what 'budget' refers to or what data is actually affected. The description does not distinguish this tool from sibling budget_reset_budget.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as budget_reset_budget or budget_reset_budget_rollover. The description provides no context about prerequisites, the need to set confirm=true, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate or inappropriate. The large sibling list creates ambiguity that the description does not resolve.

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