toast_list_cash_entries

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It communicates read-only intent via 'List' and narrows the scope to paid in/paid out entries, but it does not mention filtering behavior, required parameter relationships, pagination, permissions, or what happens when no filters are supplied.

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, tight sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core verb and object. However, the brevity comes at the cost of omitting useful detail, so it is good but not excellent.

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?

Despite appearing simple, this tool has four undocumented optional parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and many closely related sibling tools. The description leaves unclear whether filters are mutually exclusive, whether a filter is required, and what result set shape to expect. This is not complete enough for confident autonomous invocation.

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 0%, and the description only hints at two of the four parameters: drawerGuid and businessDate. employeeGuid and restaurantGuid are left entirely unexplained. The description provides partial compensation but not enough for an agent to confidently understand all optional inputs.

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 states a specific action ('List') and resource ('cash entries'), and clarifies the resource scope with 'paid in/paid out.' This helps distinguish it from drawer-level tools like toast_list_cash_drawers, though it does not explicitly contrast with toast_list_cash_deposits.

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 says the entries can be listed 'for a cash drawer or business date,' giving some context, but it does not explain when to use this tool versus related tools like toast_list_cash_deposits or toast_get_cash_drawer_summary. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided.

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