report_combined

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains the combined nature, why it's useful (ignoring cash savings etc.), and hints at read-only behavior. Lacks explicit mention of side effects or permissions, but adequate for a reporting tool.

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 at two sentences plus a bold directive and alternatives. It front-loads the core purpose, then adds usage context and differentiation, with zero wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description explains the conceptual output (balance sheet and cash flow trends) and provides enough context for an agent to decide usage. It covers purpose, alternatives, and rationale, though return format details are absent.

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% and the schema already describes the 'limit' parameter well. The description adds context by mentioning 'same limit' as underlying calls, but does not provide additional semantic details beyond what schema offers, so baseline 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 provides both balance sheet and cash flow trends in one call, with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings report_balance and report_flow by noting equivalence, avoiding ambiguity.

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?

Explicitly positions itself as the primary entry point for wealth-trajectory questions, provides example queries, and contrasts with show_snapshot for market-driven analysis. Offers clear when-to-use guidance with alternatives.

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