Umsätze exportieren

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the output format (plist with bookingDate, amount, name, purpose in booking order per day) and a critical prerequisite: MoneyMoney must be unlocked. This is useful operational context beyond a simple read.

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 concise, covering purpose, output semantics, use-case context, and prerequisites in a few sentences. Slightly dense with technical terms but no wasted words.

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?

The description covers the output structure and unlock requirement well. However, it doesn't mention behavior for the CSV format option (a parameter with enum), nor describe error cases (e.g., invalid account name). For a tool with 4 params, no output schema, and no annotations, some gaps remain.

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%, so the schema documents all parameters (dates, account, format). The description adds value by noting the account needs to be the exact name and referencing export_accounts as the source for account names, plus clarifying date inclusivity implicitly. The plist output details supplement what the schema lacks.

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 it exports a Konto's transactions in a date range, with a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from its sibling tool export_accounts, which could cause confusion about which export tool to use.

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 indicates it's the target list ('Soll-Liste') for invoice reconciliation, giving some usage context. However, it doesn't explicitly say when to use this vs export_accounts, and no exclusion criteria are given.

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