Reallocate Budget

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

The description fully discloses behavioral traits: transfers money, works across platforms, validates ID inequality, checks non-negative source budget, and returns updated budgets. Annotations already show non-readOnly and non-destructive, but description adds crucial context (validation, cross-platform, returns).

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 three sentences, each earning its place: first sentence states action and cross-platform capability, second lists parameters with constraints, third describes validation and output. Extremely efficient and informative.

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 tool's complexity (3 parameters, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is remarkably complete. It covers inputs, constraints, validation logic, and return value, leaving no ambiguity for an AI agent.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds that the amount is in campaign currency and that IDs must differ, which goes beyond schema constraints. Slight deduction as it could explicitly state that 'from_campaign_id' and 'to_campaign_id' refer to valid campaigns.

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 uses specific verbs ('Transfer a dollar amount from one campaign's daily budget to another') and clearly states the resource ('campaign daily budgets'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like budget_analyze by specifying a concrete action.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool (for cross-platform budget reallocation) and includes both when-not-to-use (rejects identical IDs) and constraints (source budget must stay non-negative). It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like budget_analyze (which analyzes rather than transfers).

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