freee_segment_pnl

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It indicates the tool is read-only (retrieves) and requires a paid plan. No mention of side effects, rate limits, or error handling, but no contradictions. Adequate but could be more thorough.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, no wasted words. Every sentence contributes essential information.

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 5-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, parameter usage, and a key requirement (paid plan). It does not describe the return format, but the context is sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 baseline is 3. Description adds value by explaining dimension enum values (e.g., 'segment_1/2/3 (セグメント1-3)') and noting that companyId defaults to FREEE_DEFAULT_COMPANY_ID. This enhances understanding 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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves profit and loss by department or segment, specifies the dimension parameter, and lists data returned (revenue, profit, cost). This distinguishes it from siblings like freee_get_profit_loss (overall P&L) and freee_cost_analysis (cost-focused), earning top marks.

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?

Description explicitly positions the tool for 'divisional profitability analysis and management reporting,' which implies when to use it. However, it does not mention alternative tools for other scenarios (e.g., overall P&L) or when not to use it, leaving some ambiguity.

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