get_spending_by_category

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses read-only behavior through 'Get' and aggregation behavior via 'broken down by category', plus date filtering. However, it does not mention return format, whether uncategorized transactions are included, or date range inclusivity, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence of ten words. It contains no filler, redundancy, or extraneous information, making it maximally concise.

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 simple tool with two well-documented parameters, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description is largely complete. It states the input scope and the output grouping. Minor gaps remain about exact response structure and handling of uncategorized data, but these are not critical for a straightforward read operation.

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?

The input schema provides 100% parameter coverage with descriptions for start_date and end_date, so the description need not repeat syntax. It adds only the context that these dates bound the spending range, which is a baseline contribution.

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 the specific verb 'Get' with the resource 'spending' and qualifies it with 'broken down by category' and 'for a date range'. This makes the tool's purpose clear and distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_spending_summary or get_uncategorized_summary.

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?

No explicit guidance is given for when to use this tool versus alternatives. The date-range hint implies a temporal scope, but no exclusions or alternative tool names are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer selection criteria from sibling names alone.

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