ListMoneyMovements

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: result ordering (newest first), grouping of same-action movements via money_movement_group_id, and the null-category convention meaning Ready to Assign.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, then domain conventions, then a routing hint. Nothing is redundant, though the middle sentence on null IDs is dense for a description rather than schema documentation.

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 values need no explanation, and the description covers the main interpretive quirks an agent needs (ordering, grouping, Ready to Assign convention). Adequate for a zero-required-param read tool; only minor gaps remain, such as default page size behavior.

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% for the three input parameters (limit, month, plan_id), so the schema carries the load and baseline 3 applies. The description's notes about missing from_category_id/to_category_id explain response-field semantics rather than the documented inputs, so it does not add input-level parameter meaning.

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 and resource ('List money moved between categories, or between a category and Ready to Assign') plus ordering ('newest first'), which cleanly separates it from ListTransactions and MoveMoney. An agent can identify the tool without opening the schema.

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 (listing historical movements) and a concrete prerequisite routing hint: 'Use ListCategories to resolve IDs.' It does not explicitly contrast with MoveMoney or ListTransactions, but the read-vs-write distinction is implied and the ID-resolution guidance is actionable.

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