Budget Reset Budget

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description's 'may delete, clear, reset, or otherwise remove data' adds little beyond the structured hints. It does not disclose what specific data is removed, whether the operation is scoped to a month/category, or what state remains. No contradiction exists with the annotations, but the behavioral context is minimal.

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 short, but not effectively concise: the second sentence 'This may delete, clear, reset, or otherwise remove data' is vague and repeats the destructive annotation without operational value. The lack of specificity is under-specification rather than tight writing, and the description is not front-loaded with the most useful 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?

This is a destructive operation with 7 parameters, no output schema, and a large sibling toolset, yet the description provides almost no operational context. It fails to explain what data is reset, how month filters the operation, what overwrite_existing does, or how this differs from budget_clear_budget. An agent would be unable to predict the tool's effect or invoke it confidently.

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 only 29%, and the description does not mention any parameters. The required 'month' parameter has no description, and important options such as category_ids, category_type, budget_variability, and overwrite_existing are left entirely unexplained. With low schema coverage, the description needed to compensate, but it does not.

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 'Reset budget' essentially restates the tool name without specifying what a reset entails. It does not distinguish this from siblings like budget_clear_budget or budget_reset_budget_rollover, and gives no detail about scope (e.g., month, categories, amounts). The added clause 'may delete, clear, reset, or otherwise remove data' is too generic to clarify the actual resource being affected.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as budget_clear_budget, budget_reset_budget_rollover, or the various budget_set_* tools. There is no mention of prerequisites, filters, or conditions that would help an agent choose this operation.

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