expense_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only summary operation with no destructive actions, but does not disclose auth needs, rate limits, or behavioral traits like aggregation logic. The description lacks detail but is not misleading.

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, zero redundancy. The purpose is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds essential usage instruction. Every sentence earns its place.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 optional params, output schema exists), the description covers the core use case. It could mention output structure details (e.g., categories listed) but is sufficient for a basic summary tool.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that year and month are optional filters and leaving them empty gives all-time totals. This adds meaningful context beyond the schema, though it could further specify parameter ranges or format.

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 'Category-wise spending summary' clearly indicating the tool provides a summary grouped by category. It distinguishes from sibling summary tools like monthly_summary or budget_summary by specifying the grouping dimension, though the verb is implicit.

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 one usage hint: 'Leave year/month empty for all-time totals,' but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings (e.g., budget_summary, event_summary). No explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives are mentioned.

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