aged_receivables

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

The description explicitly states 'read-only snapshot', which is a key behavioral trait. However, with no annotations, it lacks details on auth, rate limits, or data freshness. The description partially fulfills but is not comprehensive.

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 and to the point, which is efficient. However, it sacrifices necessary detail, making it under-specified rather than appropriately concise.

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 complexity (2 optional params, output schema exists), the description is insufficient. It explains purpose but not how to use parameters or what the output contains, leaving gaps for the 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not mention or explain the parameters (to_date, from_date). It adds no meaning beyond the schema types and optionality, which is insufficient for agent usage.

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 it is an aged receivables/outstanding customer balances read-only snapshot. It is specific and distinct from siblings like aged_payables. However, it could be more action-oriented (e.g., 'Retrieve aged receivables').

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or contexts. It only labels it as read-only without further context.

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