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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds the important limitation that vacancy and taxation are not included ('vacance et fiscalite non incluses'), which is valuable behavioral context beyond annotations. It does not mention output format or assumptions, but the core behavior is disclosed.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and the pedagogical note is appended efficiently. No filler or repetition.

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?

The description does not describe the return value or structure. It says it calculates gross and net yield, but an agent may not know if it returns a number, a pair, or an object with keys like 'brut' and 'net'. With no output schema, this ambiguity is a gap. The description also lacks details on calculation assumptions, but the pedagogical disclaimer helps.

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. It lists the inputs (loyer, charges, taxe fonciere, frais de notaire, travaux) but does not clarify units or meaning beyond the parameter names. For example, 'frais_notaire_pct' is not stated to be a percentage, and 'charges_annuelles' is not specified as annual. This leaves ambiguity for the agent.

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?

Description states a specific verb 'Calcule' and a specific resource 'rendement locatif brut et net', listing the inputs. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like simuler_frais_notaire by focusing on overall rental yield rather than just notary fees.

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 rental yield calculation but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it. It lacks guidance on choosing between this tool and simuler_frais_notaire or other siblings, though the pedagogical note hints at a simplified scope.

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