entry_sums

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get', implying read-only, but doesn't disclose the aggregation behavior, the effect of the 'range' parameter, filtering capabilities, or any other important behavioral aspects. This is insufficient for a tool with 8 parameters.

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 a single sentence of 8 words, directly stating the action and resource. It is front-loaded, concise, and contains no unnecessary 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?

The tool is moderately complex with 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, yet the description is minimal. It fails to explain that sums can be aggregated by day/week/month (via range), that filters (tags, accounts, categories, type) are available, or what the response format looks like. Important behavioral context is missing.

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?

The input schema provides descriptions for all 8 parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond the overall purpose, and the phrase 'daily sums' might even conflict with the range parameter that allows week/month aggregation.

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 the action ('Get') and resource ('daily sums of entries'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like entry_list or entry_get. However, the word 'daily' is potentially misleading since the 'range' parameter supports week/month aggregation, making the purpose slightly imprecise.

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 usage context is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives such as entry_list, entry_timeline, or analyze_spending_by_category. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or recommended scenarios.

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