get_users_by_id_mir_by_year_by_month

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that, such as auth needs, response shape implications, or what 'extended' changes.

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 short and front-loaded with the purpose, followed by an explicit endpoint and args. Some lines, like 'year: Path parameter,' add little value, but overall it is appropriately compact.

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?

With an output schema and safe read annotations present, the description does not need to explain return values or safety. However, it leaves gaps around what a 'month in review' includes and what 'extended' actually returns, making it minimally adequate rather than complete.

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%, so the description carries the burden for parameter meaning. It explains 'id' well (slug or 'me') and vaguely mentions extended, but 'year' and 'month' are only labeled as path parameters, adding no real semantic value.

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 clear action and resource: 'Get month in review' for a user, year, and month. It is specific enough to identify the tool's purpose, but does not explicitly differentiate it from the closely related sibling get_users_by_id_yir_by_year.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any exclusions. It only restates the endpoint and parameters, leaving the agent to infer the use case from the name and route.

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