list_budgets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the default compact format, the 'Showing X-Y of Z' lead line, pagination semantics, limit=0 count-only behavior, and the difference between verbose and default output. This is strong behavioral context though it doesn't disclose performance or rate-limit characteristics.

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 compact and front-loaded. The first sentence states the core purpose, followed by a brief paragraph on output format and pagination, then a terse Args block. Every sentence earns its place with zero filler.

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 covers output format, pagination, count-only mode, and verbose mode. An output schema exists, so return-value details beyond the envelope distinction aren't required. It could mention the verbose field's interaction with the envelope more, but overall it's complete for this 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 fully compensate. It does: verbose=true explained as returning the full JSON envelope, limit explained as page size with default 50, max 250, and 0=count-only, offset explained as 0-indexed first row. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare schema field names.

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 'Lists all budgets in the book' with a specific verb (list) and resource (budgets in the book). It also describes the output format, pagination, and verbose mode, distinguishing it from siblings like get_budget and create_budget.

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?

While it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools, the description gives clear context on when to use each parameter (limit, offset, verbose) and the tool's purpose is clearly for listing all budgets. It covers paging behavior and count-only mode. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance but the verb+scope distinction from get_budget/create_budget is implied.

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