get_summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of revealing behavior. It discloses what the summary includes and the conditional inclusion of budget amounts when date ranges align with budget periods. However, it does not mention permissions, rate limits, or potential errors, which is a moderate gap for a read-only tool.

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 concise and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core purpose, the second expands on output, and the tip adds practical guidance. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 simple read-only summary tool with no output schema, the description covers the return contents, the conditional budget behavior, and offers a practical usage tip. It is complete enough for an agent to understand what will be returned, though it could be explicit about the read-only nature.

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 the schema already describes each parameter. The description adds a helpful date-range example in the tip, but it does not provide additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema offers, making baseline 3 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 gets a budget summary for a date range and specifies the contents: income, spending, per-category breakdown with budget vs actual. This is a specific verb+resource action that distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_transactions or get_accounts.

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 implies usage through the date-range parameter and provides a tip for monthly overviews, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it exclude cases where another tool would be more appropriate.

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