Get Finance Report

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must explain behavior. It describes the output but does not state whether the tool is read-only or has side effects. Since it's a report, read-only is implied, but explicit disclosure would improve transparency.

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 long, concise, and front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value: the first explains what the tool does, and the second provides context and a date format reminder. No redundant or missing 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 tool with no output schema, the description lists the key fields in the output (total orders, returns, commission, etc.), which is sufficient for an agent to understand what it returns. It does not describe pagination or error cases, but these are not critical for a basic report tool.

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% with descriptions for all parameters. The description adds value by specifying the date format ('YYYY-MM-DD'), which is not in the parameter descriptions. This helps the agent use the correct format. The 'with_details' parameter is not mentioned in the description, but that is covered by 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 clearly states the tool retrieves a cash flow statement for a period, listing specific metrics like total orders, returns, commission, etc. It also gives an example usage ('how much did I earn this month') and distinguishes itself from sibling tools which are for products, orders, and other non-finance operations.

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 'Great for quick financial overview' and provides a usage example, indicating when to use this tool. However, it does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternatives, though no alternative finance report tools exist among siblings.

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