Get cash flow summary

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

注释已经提供了readOnlyHint、openWorldHint、idempotentHint等安全属性。描述额外补充了“exact”聚合和“省略两个日期表示当前月”的行为，这些是注释未涵盖的有价值信息。没有矛盾。

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?

两句话简洁明了，第一句定义功能，第二句说明日期行为，没有任何冗余内容。信息密度高且易于理解。

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?

对于仅有两个可选参数的简单工具，描述配合全面的注释和输出模式，已经提供了调用所需的所有关键信息。日期范围语义和精确聚合都清晰，无需额外解释。

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?

输入模式中两个参数都有详细格式描述（100%覆盖），描述进一步解释了省略两个日期时的语义（默认为当前月），这为参数添加了超出模式本身的信息。

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?

描述明确说明了工具的功能：获取特定日期范围内的收入、支出、储蓄和储蓄率的精确汇总。动词“Get”和资源“cash flow summary”都清晰。但没有与兄弟工具（如get_cashflow）进行区分，所以未达到最高分。

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?

描述提供了使用指导：“Omit both dates for the current month”说明了何时省略参数，但没有明确说明何时应使用此工具而非替代工具（如get_cashflow）。上下文隐含但未明确排除或推荐替代方案。

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