Add Expense

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. Only the date default is mentioned. There is no information about idempotency, validation errors, success response, or side effects. The mutation behavior (creating an expense) is implicit.

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 sentences, extremely concise and front-loaded. Every word contributes meaning. No redundancy or filler.

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?

For a simple create tool with 4 parameters fully described in schema, the description is adequate but minimal. It lacks details on success indicators, error handling, or duplicate behavior. Contextually acceptable but not thorough.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds 'Date defaults to today', which is already stated in the schema. No additional semantic value is provided beyond what the schema contains.

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?

Description clearly states the purpose: 'Record a new expense'. The verb 'record' and resource 'expense' are explicit. Sibling tools include 'list_expenses', 'delete_expense', and 'summarize', making 'add_expense' distinct, though no direct differentiation is stated.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While it is intuitive for adding, the description does not mention that this is for adding single expenses or how it differs from the listed sibling tools (e.g., 'list_expenses' for viewing, 'delete_expense' for removal).

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