entry_manage

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'manage' and gives no indication of destructive potential, reversibility, permission requirements, or the effects of add/set/remove operations.

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 one sentence, but it is under-specified rather than concise. It provides no structural information and fails to convey the schema's organization into selection criteria and mutation actions.

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?

This is a complex tool with nested objects for 'with', 'add', 'set', and 'remove', no output schema, and no annotations. The description is completely inadequate for an agent to understand the tool's scope, selection semantics, or mutation behavior.

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 each parameter includes its own description, so the absent parameter info in the tool description is acceptable. However, the description adds no value in connecting the parameters to the intended bulk workflow.

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 'Manage entries in bulk in Toshl Finance' restates the tool name (entry_manage) without specifying a concrete verb or action. It does not distinguish from sibling tools like entry_update, entry_delete, or entry_create.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description mentions 'in bulk' but does not clarify scenarios where bulk management is appropriate or how it differs from single-entry operations.

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