offsets__settlement_batch

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

The description explicitly labels the tool as read-only, which is the primary behavioral trait. It also lists the returned data fields (purchases, mass_g, cost_minor), adding transparency beyond the schema. However, it does not mention error conditions or rate limits, but since there are no annotations, this is acceptable.

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 extremely concise: two sentences covering purpose, data returned, and optional filtering. Every word adds value, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description explains the core functionality and output fields. However, it lacks details on the output format or how this tool fits into the offsets workflow, which would aid completeness.

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 description adds meaning to the 'since' parameter by specifying it is an optional ISO-8601 timestamp. However, it does not explain the 'buyer' parameter format or constraints, which is a gap given the schema has 0% description coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the tool provides a read-only cash-settlement summary for a buyer, listing exact sums of retirements. It distinguishes itself from other offsets tools by specifying that it returns aggregated settlement data, not individual purchases or lists.

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 mentions it is read-only and optionally filterable by ISO-8601 timestamp, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus other offsets tools like 'offsets__net_position' or 'offsets__book'. No prerequisites or alternatives are provided.

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