Set budget amount

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

Annotations already communicate readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the description carries a lower burden. It usefully adds that 0 clears the budget, but it does not explain how category_id and category_group_id interact or what start_date and apply_to_future affect.

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?

Two dense sentences with no filler. The core action, the one-category-or-group constraint, and the clear-on-zero behavior are all front-loaded and each sentence 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?

For a tool with five parameters and only 20% schema description coverage, the description is under-specified. It does not clarify whether at least one of category_id or category_group_id is required, how start_date and apply_to_future behave, or what output can be expected beyond the provided output schema.

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 only 20%, and the description only meaningfully explains amount (0 clears it). It leaves amount units, start_date semantics, apply_to_future behavior, and the selection between category_id and category_group_id largely unspecified.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('Set') and resource ('monthly budget'), and adds the key constraint 'exactly one category or category group.' This clearly distinguishes it from read-only siblings like get_budgets and from the transaction/account tools.

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 gives clear usage context: this is the write operation for monthly budgets, constrained to one category or category group, and amount 0 clears it. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it misses a full 5.

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