Planned operations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description usefully adds that results include recurrence, overdue and forecast flags plus expected expense/income totals, but says nothing about pagination, result size, or how the overdue/forecast flags are computed.

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?

A single dense sentence that front-loads the resource and then the returned signals; nothing is wasted, though the list-of-nouns style is slightly heavy for one sentence.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, the description does carry the return-shape burden by naming the flags and totals. Only minor gaps (pagination/volume, ordering) remain.

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% and the defaults (30 days ahead, 7 days ago, forecast included) are documented per-parameter in the schema. The description adds only the date-range concept, so the 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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (scheduled/recurring ZenMoney reminders still planned in a date range), and enumerates the payload content (recurrence, overdue, forecast flags, expected totals). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like list_transactions or list_debts, though it never names a contrasting sibling explicitly.

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?

Use is only implied by the phrase 'still planned in a date range'; there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over list_transactions or get_budget, and no prerequisite or exclusion guidance. Adequate but leaves the routing decision to inference.

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