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

Annotations only provide readOnlyHint=true. The description adds transparency by stating the data source (IPC histórico del INE base 2021=100) and the specific outputs (valor equivalente, inflación acumulada, inflación media anual). No contradictions.

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, efficiently front-loading purpose and methodology. Every sentence adds value without 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 full schema coverage and annotations indicating read-only, the description explains the outputs (equivalente, inflación acumulada, CAGR) and data source. No return value schema exists, but outputs are clearly described.

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% with already clear parameter descriptions. The description adds little beyond restating the year range and mentioning 'o pesetas históricas', which is implied. Baseline 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 tool calculates the purchasing power equivalent of a monetary amount between two years in Spain (1961-2025), specifying the verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling calculator tools by focusing on inflation adjustment.

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 provides context for when to use the tool ('Útil para comparar salarios, precios o inversiones entre épocas diferentes'), but does not explicitly exclude cases or compare with siblings. However, siblings are all distinct calculator tools, so no exclusion is necessary.

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