List budget expenses on a Wanderlog trip

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses ordering ('newest entries last'), the fields returned per line, and empty-state behavior ('friendly message when the trip has no matching expenses'). It does not mention read-only semantics, permissions, or behavior with very large expense lists, leaving minor gaps.

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?

Three short sentences, each doing work: purpose, return shape, and filter/routing advice. The ordering fact is front-loaded and there is no filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description properly covers return content, ordering, and the empty case, and all five parameters are documented in the schema. Minor omissions remain around whether trip_key is an ID or slug and any pagination behavior for long expense lists.

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 100%, and the schema already documents case-insensitivity for description/currency, the YYYY-MM-DD pattern, and the ISO 4217 constraint. The description only restates which filters exist, adding no syntax or matching semantics beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Lists budget expenses on a Wanderlog trip') with explicit scope. The sibling set includes add/remove/edit expense tools, and the description makes clear this one only reads.

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 routes the agent: use the filters to find the exact expense to hand to wanderlog_remove_expense or wanderlog_edit_expense when several are similar. That is a concrete when-to-use next step. It lacks an exclusion note (e.g., when to prefer wanderlog_get_trip) but the context is clear.

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