Compute Profit and Loss

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

Annotations already declare the tool as readOnly (readOnlyHint=true) and idempotent (idempotentHint=true). The description adds a basic explanation of the report content but does not elaborate on caching behavior despite the 'fresh' parameter, nor on response format.

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 very concise with two sentences, but the second sentence is somewhat redundant given the tool name. It could be more structured to include key behavior.

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 simple read-only report with 3 parameters, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks details on output format or any side effects, and the sibling context is large but not addressed.

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?

All three parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no extra meaning beyond what is already provided. The 'fresh' parameter is not explained in the description.

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 it computes a profit and loss statement for a period and explains the formula (revenue minus expenses). However, it does not distinguish this tool from sibling report tools like compute_balance_sheet or compute_trial_balance.

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 implies usage for computing P&L over a date range, but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus other report tools, nor any specific conditions or alternatives.

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