List Budgets

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description's 'List all budgets' is consistent. However, the description adds no further behavioral context beyond the annotations, and the misleading parameter reference slightly detracts.

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 has two sentences; the first is concise and relevant, the second is confusing and unnecessary. It could be more focused on the actual parameter.

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 simple tool with one optional boolean parameter and an output schema, the description partially explains the tool's purpose but fails to mention the includeAccounts parameter. The misleading reference to budgetId reduces completeness.

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% (1 parameter described), but the description does not explain the includeAccounts parameter. Instead, it introduces a non-existent budgetId parameter, which misleads about the tool's input requirements.

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 'List all budgets' which is a specific verb and resource. However, it also mentions 'omit budgetId to use the last-used budget' despite budgetId not being a parameter in the schema. This introduces confusion and reduces clarity.

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 attempts to guide usage by suggesting to use a budget ID from results, but the reference to 'omit budgetId' is misleading because budgetId is not a parameter. No explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives are provided.

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