Get Month

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description's 'Read-only' adds no new safety information beyond that. It does add useful scoping context (single month, all category fields, dollars), but no additional operational behavior such as pagination, errors, or side effects is disclosed.

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 densely informative sentences with no filler. The core scope and payload are front-loaded, the companion alternative is placed at the end, and every clause 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?

For a read-only getter with full schema coverage, rich annotations, and an output schema, the description is complete. It tells the agent what data it returns, when to use it, and which sibling tool complements it for a narrower use case.

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 both parameters are already documented including month format and budgetId default behavior. The description adds contextual value by clarifying the result is for one budget month and expressed in dollars, but it doesn't meaningfully expand on parameter mechanics beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pair ('Get one budget month's detail') and precisely enumerates the payload: month totals plus every category's budgeted/activity/balance and goal fields in dollars. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like get_month_category or list_months, which cover singular categories or month lists.

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?

It explicitly identifies this as 'the workhorse for monthly reviews and budget-vs-actual questions,' giving an agent a clear trigger context. It also names get_overspent_categories as the companion for negative balances only, providing a concrete when-to-use versus when-not-to-use distinction.

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