entry_create

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly states that this tool creates an entry, and it discloses the special behavior for transfers. However, it does not mention the response format, required permissions, idempotency, or side effects beyond creation, leaving some behavioral 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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and includes only essential information. No wasted words.

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 create tool with 8 parameters and nested objects, the description covers the primary use case and a significant variant (transfers). It does not explicitly describe return values, but the schema provides detailed parameter semantics. There is room to mention validation or response, but overall the description is reasonably 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of the transaction object for transfers, which is not fully explicit in the schema alone. It also ties the category field to transfers in the schema, but the description reinforces the transfer use case.

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 'Create a new entry in Toshl Finance' with a specific verb and resource. It also highlights the distinct sub-case of creating transfers, which differentiates this tool from update/delete/list siblings and even entry_convert_to_transfer.

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 explicit context for when to use the transaction object (for transfers), which is useful usage guidance. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or point to alternatives like entry_update or entry_manage, though the create vs. manage distinction is implied.

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