List Budgets

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

Annotations provide readOnlyHint=true, which the description doesn't contradict. The description adds valuable context: it discloses the API call cost ('[1 API call]'), which isn't covered by annotations, and hints at access control ('user has access to'). However, it doesn't mention pagination, rate limits, or response format details.

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, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded with key information (API call cost and core purpose) and uses clear, direct language. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (one optional parameter), high schema coverage, and read-only annotation, the description is mostly complete. It adds API call cost and access context. However, without an output schema, it doesn't describe the return format (e.g., list structure, fields), leaving a minor gap for a list tool.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents the 'include_accounts' parameter. The description adds marginal value by mentioning 'optional account info', which aligns with the parameter but doesn't provide additional semantics beyond what's in the schema. Baseline 3 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 verb 'List' and resource 'budgets', specifies scope 'all budgets the user has access to', and distinguishes from siblings like 'get_budget' (singular) by indicating it returns multiple budgets. It's specific and differentiated.

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 retrieving budgets, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this vs. alternatives like 'get_budget' (for a single budget) or other list tools. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, leaving usage context somewhat implied rather than explicit.

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