Get billing summary for a matter

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

Description adds context beyond readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations by detailing the aggregated fields returned. No contradictions; behavioral traits are clear.

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?

Single sentence that front-loads the purpose and lists specific outputs. No superfluous information; every word 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 simple read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully explains what the tool returns. No gaps remain.

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 0%, but the single parameter 'matter_id' (integer, required) is self-explanatory given the tool name. Description does not add extra meaning but the parameter is simple enough to not require further elaboration.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'aggregates totals' and lists exact return fields: total billed, total paid, outstanding balance, date of most-recently-issued bill. Clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like clio_get_bill (individual bill) and clio_list_bills (listing bills).

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?

Implies usage for obtaining a financial summary of a matter, but no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives or when not to use. Sibling tools list is extensive but no differentiation mentioned.

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