FindOverspending

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotentHint/destructiveHint, so safety is covered. Beyond that, the description discloses the actual ranking algorithm (Ready to Assign first, then the categories with the most available money that aren't saving toward an underfunded target) and that human choice precedes any mutation, which is real behavioral context an agent needs.

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 sentences, zero filler: the action leads, the selection heuristic follows, and the hand-off to MoveMoney closes. Every clause earns its place and the most decision-relevant information is front-loaded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-shape explanation is unnecessary, and the description still covers purpose, algorithmic behavior, and the next tool to call. For a read-only 3-parameter diagnostic tool, nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so 'month', 'plan_id', and 'max_candidates' are already fully documented in the schema. The description only indirectly reinforces the month scope and adds no syntax, defaults, or constraint detail for max_candidates. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the parameter burden.

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 ('Find') and resource ('overspent categories (negative available)') with the scope ('in a month'), immediately distinguishing it from sibling query tools. It also names the sibling that consumes its output (MoveMoney), so the agent can place it precisely among 34 siblings.

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?

Gives clear context for use and explicitly routes the follow-up action: 'Use MoveMoney to cover after the user picks,' which separates the read/diagnose step from the write step. It stops short of stating when-not to use it or any prerequisite (e.g., that the plan must be openable), but the workflow guidance is unambiguous.

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