t2000_earnings

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

No annotations provided. Description implies a read operation ('View') but does not explicitly state safety, authentication needs, or potential side effects. Given the simple nature of the tool, the description is adequate but lacks explicit behavioral guarantees.

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, no redundant words. The first sentence states the purpose and scope, and the second provides an alternative. Front-loaded and efficient.

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?

Given no parameters, no output schema, and the simple nature of the tool, the description is complete. It specifies the data returned (total earned, daily rate, current APY) and provides usage guidance via a sibling tool alternative.

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?

No parameters in input schema (0 params). Description does not need to add parameter info since schema already indicates no parameters are required. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and no additional parameter details are necessary.

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?

Description clearly states 'View yield earnings from savings positions' with specific data points (total earned, daily rate, current APY). It also distinguishes from sibling 't2000_overview' by explicitly mentioning an alternative for a full account snapshot.

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?

Explicitly says when to use this tool (view earnings) and when to prefer an alternative ('For a full account snapshot, prefer t2000_overview instead'). This provides clear context for tool selection.

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