update_category_budget

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

The description discloses the dry_run parameter's behavior (preview without updating) but does not mention other behavioral traits such as idempotency, overwrite semantics, required permissions, or side effects. No annotations exist to compensate.

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 concise: a single sentence for purpose followed by a structured Args block that is efficient and front-loaded. Every sentence adds value, with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (context indicates it exists), the description covers parameter semantics and dry_run behavior adequately. However, it could mention idempotency or effects on existing budgets, though not critical.

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 description adds detailed semantics for all 5 parameters (e.g., month format, amount as dollar, budget_id default, dry_run purpose) beyond the schema's type-only definitions. With 0% schema description coverage, this is essential and well-done.

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 verb 'set' and resource 'budgeted amount for a category in a specific month', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_transaction or update_category by specifying budget assignment to a month.

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?

The description implicitly indicates usage by defining the operation, but it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or context about prerequisites are provided.

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