ynab_set_default_budget

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

Annotations indicate non-destructive and idempotent. Description adds that it validates against YNAB API and returns a cache_warm_started flag, providing behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Well-structured with sections for Args, Returns, Examples, Errors. Each sentence is purposeful and front-loaded with the primary goal.

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?

Covers purpose, parameter semantics, return values, error handling, and an example. With an output schema present, the description is fully adequate for a single-parameter tool.

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 has 0% coverage (only type and minLength). Description explains budget_id as a 'Budget UUID' and suggests sourcing it from ynab_list_budgets, adding meaningful context not in the schema.

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?

Clearly states the action: 'Set a default budget' and the benefit: 'so other tools don't require budget_id every call.' It is distinct from siblings like get_default_budget and other tools.

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?

Describes the tool's purpose and gives examples, but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives. However, the context with sibling tools and the 'Examples' section imply usage.

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