Compute the Coast FIRE milestone — the capital required today such that, with no further contributions, a portfolio compounds to the user's retirement target by their target age.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| currency | No | USD | |
| current_age | Yes | ||
| inflation_rate | No | ||
| current_savings | Yes | ||
| monthly_savings | No | ||
| expected_return_rate | No | ||
| portfolio_volatility | No | ||
| safe_withdrawal_rate | No | ||
| target_retirement_age | Yes | ||
| annual_expenses_in_retirement | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description discloses the key assumption of no further contributions, but it does not disclose other behavioral aspects such as whether the result is adjusted for inflation, how volatility is treated, or what format the output takes. With no annotations, this gap leaves some behavior undefined.
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 entire description is one efficient sentence that front-loads the key purpose and definition. There is no waste or redundancy, and the dash-separated definition adds clarity.
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 the tool's complexity (10 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the single-sentence description is insufficient. It does not describe the output, edge cases, or financial assumptions beyond the no-contribution condition. For a financial calculator, more contextual guidance is needed.
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 description provides no parameter-specific explanations. With 10 parameters and 0% schema description coverage, it fails to explain how current_savings, annual_expenses, or rates impact the calculation, leaving the agent to rely solely on schema names.
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 'Compute' and names the exact resource 'Coast FIRE milestone', defining it as the capital needed today to compound to retirement target. This clearly differentiates from sibling 'calculate_fire_target' which likely computes the full target, not the coast milestone.
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 usage for Coast FIRE calculations but does not explicitly state when to use it over siblings like calculate_fire_target or project_wealth_plan. No exclusions or alternative guidance is given, though the definition makes the intended context reasonably clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a clearly distinct financial calculation or data retrieval purpose. Coast FIRE, FIRE target, Swiss property tax, portfolio returns, wealth projection, and rebalancing have no overlapping responsibilities.
All names are snake_case, but the verb prefixes are inconsistent: calculate_, compute_, get_, project_, rebalance_. The use of both 'calculate' and 'compute' for similar actions plus other varied verbs creates a noticeable lack of a single pattern.
Six tools is well-scoped for a financial calculator server. Each tool covers a distinct aspect of retirement and wealth planning without redundancy or bloat.
The set covers core retirement planning needs: target calculation, projection, returns data, and rebalancing. The Swiss property tax tool is a specific gap-filler. Missing general tax or simple interest tools, but not critical given the stated focus.