Cost report: summary

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false. The description adds the authorization class 'board_or_agent', which is useful beyond annotations, but it does not disclose other behavioral traits like rate limits, data scope, or pagination.

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 very concise (two sentences), but the first sentence unnecessarily repeats the title. While short, it could be more informative without adding length, e.g., by explaining the report contents.

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 large number of sibling cost tools, the description does not clarify what 'summary' entails or how this tool fits into the cost report ecosystem. An output schema exists, but the description does not hint at the return structure.

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 input schema has one required parameter (companyId) with no description. Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not compensate by explaining the parameter's meaning or format. 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 states 'Cost report: summary' and the HTTP endpoint, implying it retrieves a summary cost report for a company. However, it does not clearly distinguish this tool from sibling cost reports like 'by agent' or 'by provider', leaving ambiguity about what 'summary' specifically means.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus other cost-related tools (e.g., pc_get_companies_by_company_id_costs_by_agent). No prerequisites, exclusions, or context for usage are provided beyond the endpoint and authorization class.

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