get_financial_summary

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It lists what the summary includes but does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, has no side effects, or requires any specific permissions. The content description is helpful, but behavioral traits beyond the obvious 'get' are not disclosed.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that immediately states the purpose and specifies the key content areas. There is no redundancy or filler; every word earns its place.

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?

The tool has one optional parameter and no output schema, so the description must convey what the summary returns. It lists the main components but does not specify the return structure, currency, or any additional details that could help the agent interpret the result. This is adequate but leaves gaps in expectation setting.

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?

The input schema covers 100% of the parameter semantics, describing the 'year' parameter as the fiscal year with a default to the current year if empty. The tool description adds no additional parameter information, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool's function: obtaining a financial summary with specific components (total revenue, unpaid invoices, cash balance, and key indicators). The verb 'Obtenir' plus the resource 'résumé financier' makes the purpose unambiguous and distinct from more specialized financial reports like get_vat_report or get_trial_balance.

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 on when to use this tool versus other financial reporting tools, nor are any exclusions mentioned. The description simply states what it does without contextualizing it against siblings such as get_aged_balance or get_customer_statement.

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