Prepare Year-End Close

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds valuable context about the output: a package with unresolved items, balance check, and draft P&L entries, which goes beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the main action and key outputs. Every word earns its place without redundancy.

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 tool with one parameter and comprehensive annotations, the description is fully adequate. It explains what the tool produces, and the annotations cover safety. No output schema is needed given the clear output description.

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% with a single parameter 'year' described as 'Fiscal year (YYYY)' with min/max constraints. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score is appropriate.

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 'prepare', the resource 'dry-run year-end close package', and specifies contents like unresolved items, balance check, and draft P&L closing entries. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'execute_year_end_close' and 'month_end_close_checklist'.

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 a dry-run before actual year-end close but does not explicitly state when to use or when not to use. No alternative tools are mentioned, though context with 'execute_year_end_close' provides some guidance.

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