freee_get_profit_loss

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions efficiency and a single API call, but lacks details on authorization needs, rate limits, or response format. The description does not contradict any annotations.

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 concise (3 sentences), front-loads purpose and efficiency, and includes actionable guidance without wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description lists returned metrics (revenue, etc.) but omits structure, pagination, or response format. However, it is complete enough for a standard financial statement endpoint. Could better contrast with siblings for 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?

Input schema has 100% coverage (all parameters documented), so baseline is 3. The description adds context for breakdown_display_type and suggests usage scenarios, but does not provide additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema.

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 gets a profit and loss statement, lists key metrics (revenue, COGS, operating profit, net income), and differentiates from siblings by emphasizing efficiency and specific use cases (monthly trends, YoY comparisons, KPI dashboards).

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 provides clear when-to-use guidance (profitability analysis, segment analysis via breakdown_display_type) and ideal scenarios, but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like freee_get_trial_balance or freee_segment_pnl, nor state when not to use.

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