Get Expense Report Data

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds context about the output content (amounts and receipt information) but does not disclose other behavioral traits like handling of invalid IDs or data freshness. This is adequate but not exceptional.

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 sentence of 17 words, front-loaded with the usage instruction. Every word earns its place, and there is no extraneous information.

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 get-by-ID tool with a single required parameter, read-only annotations, and an output schema present, the description is complete. It specifies what the tool returns (formatted expense data with amounts and receipt info), which is sufficient for the agent to understand its behavior.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter (expenseId), and the description does not add any additional meaning or detail about the parameter. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate when the schema sufficiently documents the parameter.

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 tool retrieves 'formatted expense data including amounts and receipt information'. The verb 'retrieve' and resource 'formatted expense data' are specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools like report_expense_pdf (which returns PDF) and report_document_get (for document reports) by focusing on structured expense data.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when the user wants to retrieve formatted expense data...', providing a clear context for use. However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as if the user needs a PDF version or raw data.

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