get_budget_summary

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It adds only that the operation is scoped to the authenticated user, but does not mention read-only behavior, potential side effects such as caching or computation, or what data the summary covers (e.g., time period, budget categories).

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words or filler. Every word contributes to stating the core purpose.

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 zero-parameter read tool, the description is minimally adequate, but it lacks detail about the returned summary's contents. Since there is no output schema, the description should have clarified what a 'budget summary' includes (e.g., totals, time range, categories) to fully support an agent's invocation.

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 has zero parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. Per the rubric, 0 params earns a baseline score of 4. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but none is needed.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('budget summary') and clarifies scope ('for the authenticated user'). However, it does not distinguish this from sibling tools like list_budget or get_trend_analysis, leaving some ambiguity about what a 'summary' entails.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states the basic function and offers no context about scenarios, exclusions, or relationships to sibling tools.

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