day_book

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states the operation (returns vouchers) but does not disclose return format, ordering, pagination, or inclusion/exclusion criteria (e.g., whether cancelled vouchers are included).

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action and scope. Every word is informative, with no filler or repetition.

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 read-only list tool with fully documented parameters, the description is sufficient to understand the tool's core function. However, without an output schema or annotations, it could be richer by indicating result structure or limitations, but this is not critical.

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 already describes both fromDate and toDate with patterns and examples, achieving 100% coverage. The description only rephrases the date range without adding new parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 'Returns' and explicitly names the resource 'vouchers' with scope 'between two dates'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_ledgers or outstanding_balances, which serve different purposes.

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 implies the tool is for retrieving vouchers in a date range but does not explicitly state when to prefer it over alternatives or provide exclusions. There is no guidance on use cases such as 'for day book reports' or 'instead of listing ledgers'.

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