거래대사 정산 요약 조회

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full weight. It discloses date format, range limits, pagination (after, first), and store filtering. However, it does not mention rate limits, authentication needs, or potential side effects. For a read operation, this is adequate but not 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 relatively concise with 6 sentences, starting with the main purpose. It is well-structured but could be slightly more streamlined without losing information.

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 presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the typical usage scenario. It mentions the data provided (amounts, fees, cancellations, adjustments) and constraints. Could add edge cases or error conditions, but overall sufficient.

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 100%, but the description adds value beyond the schema: it explains that store is optional and can be obtained from list_stores, and that after is for pagination. This contextual guidance enhances parameter understanding.

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 it retrieves daily settlement summaries for a specific sub-store. It names the resource (settlement summaries) and the action (retrieve). While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like getSettlementStatistics, the focus on daily summaries by settlement date distinguishes it well.

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 provides explicit usage context: date format (YYYY-MM-DD), time constraints (from within last 6 months, max 1 month range), and store retrieval via list_stores. It does not state when not to use it, but the constraints give clear guidance on valid inputs.

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