P&L report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It lists data sources (paid invoices, receipt ledger, actuals) and output components, but does not clarify whether data is real-time, cached, or if there are any limitations (e.g., only completed jobs). Some transparency is present, but gaps remain.

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 two sentences, concise, and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every phrase adds value without redundancy or fluff.

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?

The description names key output components but does not specify the structure or format. Given no output schema, more detail (e.g., whether results are aggregated, grouped, or returned per job) would help completeness. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 only parameter 'month' has full schema coverage with a clear description. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema (e.g., format or default behavior), so the baseline score of 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 tool returns profit & loss data, including revenue, expenses, per-job margins, and a business scorecard. It specifies the scope can be a single month or all-time, distinguishing it from siblings like expense_report which likely focus on expenses only.

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 explains what the tool does but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus siblings such as business_snapshot or pipeline_view. The agent must infer usage from the purpose, but no when-not or alternative recommendations are given.

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