brc_create_accrual

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: creates a parent accrual and relies on shared logic for reversing child. It also warns about confirmWrite. However, it doesn't explain the draft concept or what the first call returns.

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, no fluff. Critical usage warning is front-loaded alongside purpose. Each sentence serves a distinct purpose.

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 lacks information about return values (no output schema) and does not fully explain the draft process. Given the complexity (9 params, two-step with confirmWrite) and no output schema, it could be more complete.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds little beyond what parameter descriptions already provide. The only extra is the confirmWrite warning, which is already in the schema description.

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 it creates a new parent Accrual, distinguishing it from update/delete/list tools among siblings. It also mentions the automatic generation of a reversing child transaction, which specifies the resource shape.

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?

It provides explicit guidance: 'Do not call with confirmWrite=true until the user has reviewed the draft and explicitly confirmed creation.' This helps the agent avoid premature writes and implies a two-step process.

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