Get AI Cash Position

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds value by listing specific output fields (cash anchor, burn rate, capital raises, runway scenarios) and the error condition (404), providing clear behavioral expectations beyond the annotations.

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 with four focused sentences. It is front-loaded with the purpose. No content is wasted, but it could be slightly more compact. A score of 4 reflects good efficiency without being the absolute minimum.

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 tool's simplicity (single parameter, existing output schema, annotations present), the description covers the purpose, usage, return values, and error condition comprehensively. There are no missing critical details for an agent to invoke this tool correctly.

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 100% coverage for the single parameter 'ticker', with a clear description. The tool description does not add any additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'Signal8 AI cash position model', and enumerates return data. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like get_cash_history or get_cash_runway_calendar, so it falls short of a 5.

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 provides explicit usage context: 'Use when analyzing a company's current cash situation, runway, or capital raise activity.' It also notes the 404 condition. However, it does not mention when not to use the tool or suggest alternative tools, so it does not achieve a 5.

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