log_spend

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns a confirmation with key fields, which is good, but does not disclose side effects, error conditions, idempotency, or authentication needs. The behavioral description is minimal and could be more comprehensive.

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, front-loading the purpose and providing immediate usage guidance. Every word adds value, making it very 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 the tool's simplicity and high schema coverage, the description covers the key behavior (return confirmation) and usage context. It lacks output schema but mentions return fields. Missing details on optional parameters like 'notes', but overall sufficient for a basic logging 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 coverage is high (80%), so baseline is 3. The description mentions parameters (amount, store, date, item count) but adds little beyond the schema descriptions. It does not clarify the 'notes' parameter or format nuances.

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 purpose with a specific verb ('Record') and resource ('grocery spending'), and distinguishes it from siblings like 'get_spend_log' (retrieval) and 'log_meal' (different domain). The return value is also specified.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool ('USE WHEN: logging what was spent after a shopping trip'). It does not mention alternative tools or when not to use, but the context with siblings makes the usage clear.

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