summarize_cashflow

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

With no annotations, the description is the only source of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context about using 'Plaid CLI data + local category rules', but it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, mention prerequisites beyond local rules, or describe edge cases like missing data.

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 two-sentence description is concise and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core function and data sources, the second provides a use case. No redundant phrasing.

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 2-parameter tool and no output schema, the description adequately covers what it does and when to use it, referencing its data dependencies. However, it could be more detailed about the returned summary structure or period boundaries, but this is not critical for a straightforward summarize tool.

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 schema already covers both parameters with format descriptions (YYYY-MM-DD), and the description's 'for a period' only restates the general role of the date range without adding new constraints or examples. Thus, it complements but does not enrich 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 the specific verb 'summarize' with a defined resource ('inflow/outflow and category spend') and temporal scope ('for a period'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_transactions or list_goals. It clearly conveys what the tool computes and the data sources involved.

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 phrase 'Use for monthly planning' provides a clear, actionable context for when this tool should be selected, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools (e.g., when to prefer get_transactions for detailed line items).

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