get_ledger_delinquency

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only says 'Show...status', implying a read operation but not explicitly stating it is non-destructive or safe. It also fails to mention potential error conditions (e.g., invalid ledger_id), rate limits, or authorization requirements, which are important for an agent to know.

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 two short sentences with no redundant information. The first sentence states the purpose, and the second provides usage examples, making it very efficient.

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 having an output schema (unseen), the description lacks critical parameter details and behavioral transparency. For a simple tool with few parameters, it should at least list the required inputs. The description alone is insufficient for correct 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%, requiring the description to explain parameters. The description does not mention ledger_id or facility_id at all, leaving the agent to infer that a ledger ID is needed and that facility_id is optional. This is a significant gap.

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 a specific verb ('Show') and resource ('ledger's delinquency status'), clearly indicating it retrieves overdue balance and days late. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_ledger (general ledger info) and list_current_ledgers (list of ledgers) by focusing on delinquency. The usage examples further clarify the purpose.

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 'Use when' section provides concrete, natural-language triggers ('who's behind on rent?', 'is tenant <id> past due?') that guide when to invoke this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, though the examples effectively limit scope.

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