get_latest_expenses

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does reveal useful traits: 'latest' ordering, date-range filtering, pagination via skip/limit, and semantic search via text_input. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, describe the sort direction, or clarify behavior when no filters are provided.

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 well-structured with an opening summary, an Args section, and a Returns section. It is reasonably concise, though the phrase 'by the provided criterias' is grammatically awkward and slightly vague. Overall, each section earns its place.

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?

The output schema covers the return type, and the description documents all parameters. However, it lacks sibling differentiation, explicit ordering semantics, and any note about whether this endpoint includes or excludes subscription expenses. For a tool with five optional parameters and no annotations, the description is adequate but not fully complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It lists all five parameters with types, defaults, and adds meaningful detail beyond the schema, such as YYYY-MM-DD date format and the semantic-search meaning of text_input. Skip and limit are not deeply explained, but their names and defaults make their purpose clear.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Get the latest expense records.' It also mentions searching by criteria, which broadens the purpose. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling get_latest_subscription_expenses, leaving some ambiguity about whether this covers all expenses or only non-subscription ones.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_expense_by_id or get_latest_subscription_expenses. The description does not state exclusions, prerequisites, or which sibling to choose for subscription-specific queries.

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