get_income_summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses aggregation behavior and label decoding, but does not mention pagination/truncation (max_results) or any limitations/caveats. It's adequate but lacks depth.

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, front-loaded with the primary action, and every word serves a purpose. No filler or repetition.

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 presence of complete schema descriptions and an output schema, the description covers the core functionality sufficiently. However, it could add a note about pagination and explicit usage context to be fully 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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameter semantics are already fully documented. The description adds no extra insight into parameters, but the baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 fetches INCOME bookings per classification from myDATA e-books, using the specific verb 'Fetch' and distinguishes it from siblings that handle different document types (received, transmitted, expense). The mention of aggregation and decoded labels adds precision.

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 this tool is for income summaries, and the sibling names indicate alternatives, but there is no explicit 'use this when' or 'instead of' guidance. The context is clear enough for an agent to choose it for income summary tasks.

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