freee_master_context

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

The description mentions 'Uses parallel API calls with caching', which gives insight into performance and efficiency. However, without annotations, it does not explicitly state read-only or non-destructive nature, though the context suggests it is safe. A more explicit behavior statement would improve transparency.

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 relatively short and front-loaded with the key action. The parenthetical Japanese list may be less useful for English agents, but it is still concise. Every sentence adds value, though the Japanese could be translated for broader applicability.

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 complexity of bulk retrieval and the presence of many sibling tools, the description adequately positions the tool. However, without an output schema, it does not describe the return structure. The mention of caching and parallel calls helps, but completeness could be improved by explaining the response format.

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%, so the parameter descriptions already explain companyId and include. The description adds that include fetches only specific categories, but this is mostly redundant with the schema. No additional semantic depth is provided beyond 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 the tool fetches all master data in one call, listing specific categories (勘定科目・メモタグ・部門・セグメント・品目・取引先) and emphasizing bulk retrieval for advisory context. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like freee_get_account_items and freee_get_tags that retrieve individual categories.

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 advises using the 'include' parameter to fetch specific categories and notes it is essential for providing accounting advice without multiple tool calls. It implicitly suggests use when you need reference data, but does not explicitly state when to use alternative individual get tools.

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