Goals Withdraw From Goal

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description's note 'may create or update Monarch data' adds minimal value. Additional behavioral details (e.g., side effects on goal progress, account balances, or budget) are absent. No contradiction with 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?

The description is very short, which is concise, but at the cost of completeness. The second sentence is vague ('This may create or update Monarch data') and does not earn its place. A balance of brevity and informativeness is missing.

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 (9 parameters, no output schema, many sibling tools), the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain return values, necessary preconditions, or the effect on related entities. Agents cannot make informed decisions to invoke this tool from the description alone.

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 low (22%), but the description provides no information about any of the 9 parameters. Parameters like goal_id, account_id, amount, date, notes, include_in_budget are left unexplained, forcing the agent to rely solely on parameter names.

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 'Withdraw from goal'. The verb is specific, but it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'goals_contribute_to_goal' or 'goals_delete_goal'. However, the purpose is directly understandable.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No prerequisites, conditions, or context for proper invocation are provided. The description lacks instructions on when a withdrawal is appropriate.

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