Budget Set Budget Amount

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

Annotations already establish that this is a non-read-only, non-idempotent mutation. The description adds vague context that it 'may create or update Monarch data,' which is useful but shallow. It does not disclose what happens to existing budget amounts, how apply_to_future affects behavior, or any prerequisite conditions.

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 very compact, with the core action front-loaded in the first sentence. The second sentence is generic but adds a small behavioral note, and there is no wasted wording.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and minimal schema descriptions, this tool needs more context on required inputs, return shape, and side effects. The description only states what the tool does, not how to invoke it correctly or what to expect afterward.

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 contributes no parameter explanation beyond the bare action. Month format, category_id semantics, default_amount behavior, and apply_to_future effects are all left unexplained, forcing the agent to guess.

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 clearly states the action ('Set budget amount') and the resource being operated on, so an agent can grasp the basic operation. However, it does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools like budget_set_budget_group_amount or budget_set_flex_budget_amount, leaving ambiguity about scope.

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_set_budget_group_amount or goals_set_goal_budget_amount. The sentence about creating/updating Monarch data addresses side effects, not usage context or selection criteria.

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