amazon_breakdown

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It states 'Read-only' and notes a dependency, but omits what happens if the sync hasn't run (error vs. empty result), does not describe the output format or pagination, and provides no detail on authorization or data freshness. The provided traits are minimal.

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 two sentences with zero waste. It front-loads the purpose, then adds read-only status and a prerequisite. Every word adds value, achieving maximum conciseness.

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 tool has no output schema, no annotations, and a single ambiguous parameter. The description fails to explain the return structure, default behavior for missing month, error scenarios, or any limits. For a tool that apparently queries Amazon purchase data, this is insufficient for an agent to confidently invoke it.

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?

The schema has one parameter 'month' with zero description coverage. The description mentions 'in a month', implying the parameter is the time period, but does not specify the expected format (e.g., YYYY-MM) or behavior when omitted. It adds limited meaning beyond the raw parameter name.

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's function: revealing item-level details (titles, quantities, line totals) behind Amazon charges for a month. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_category_breakdown, which focuses on categories rather than items. The purpose is specific and immediately understandable.

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 provides a prerequisite ('needs `budget amazon sync` to have run') and implies use for monthly Amazon breakdowns, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like get_category_breakdown or query_transactions. The usage context is clear but lacks explicit when-to-use versus other tools.

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