create_cash_out

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

The description mentions the amount is in RUBLES, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as required permissions, side effects of creating the order, or the fact that expense_item_href may be required. With no annotations provided, this leaves the agent without safety or prerequisite information.

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 short sentence that is easy to parse and front-loads the key information. There is no filler or redundancy.

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 there is no output schema or annotations, the description needs to explain what the tool returns and any prerequisites. It only states the action and currency. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the full context, especially the requirement for organization and agent hrefs and the optional expense item, even though these are in the schema parameters.

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 schema descriptions cover all 5 parameters, including how to obtain hrefs and the internal kopecks conversion. The description adds only the note that the amount is in RUBLES, which is already present in the schema (sum_rubles). Therefore, it provides minimal added value over the schema, so the baseline 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 action ('Create') and the resource ('cash expense order' / расходный кассовый ордер), and specifies the currency (RUBLES). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_cash_in or create_payment_out, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_payment_out or create_cash_in. The description only states what it does, leaving the selection decision to the agent without context.

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