get_public_calculator_contractUse this before running a calculator to retrieve its exact bounded input schema, output schema, methodology, assumptions, and canonical source.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| calculator | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: the result is 'exact' and 'bounded', and the tool is meant as a pre-execution step, implying it does not execute the calculator.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence that immediately states when to use the tool and what it returns. Every phrase contributes meaningful information, with no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.
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 read-only contract-fetching tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, contents, and timing. The only material gap is the lack of clarity around the input value format, which leaves the overall completeness just short of full.
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 0%, so the description must compensate for explaining the 'calculator' parameter. It only says 'a calculator' and does not specify whether the value is a slug, ID, name, or how it maps to the sibling calc_* tools. The property name is suggestive but not sufficient to form a valid value.
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 states a specific verb ('retrieve') and a precise resource ('exact bounded input schema, output schema, methodology, assumptions, and canonical source') for a calculator. It clearly distinguishes itself from running a calculator or listing calculators, so an agent can infer the tool's unique role.
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 opening phrase 'Use this before running a calculator' gives explicit timing guidance and establishes a clear workflow relationship with run_public_calculator and the calc_* siblings. It does not name alternatives or exclusions explicitly, but the intended context is 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.
The 14 calc_* tools are individually distinct, but run_public_calculator and compare_public_scenarios overlap with all of them, making it unclear when to use a specific calculator versus the generic runner. list_public_calculators and search_public_docs also have somewhat fuzzy boundaries.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (calc_*, list_*, get_*, search_*, compare_*, run_*), with no mixed casing or irregular verb styles.
At 22 tools, the set is on the heavy side and falls in the borderline 16–25 range. While most calculators earn their place, the generic run_public_calculator and compare_public_scenarios duplicate functionality already covered by the calc_* tools, inflating the count.
The surface covers a broad personal-finance calculator domain plus discovery, contract introspection, running, comparing, docs, pricing, and feature details. For a read-only educational server, there are no obvious gaps or dead ends.