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

Annotations already declare read-only and idempotent behavior. The description adds the calculation formula, which constitutes the core behavioral detail for a pure computation tool. 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?

A single, information-dense sentence communicates the exact formula with no filler. The structure is front-loaded and immediately scannable.

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 three-parameter ratio calculator with a full schema and output schema, the formula description covers everything needed. There is no hidden logic or state to disclose.

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 descriptions cover all three parameters at 100%, but the description's formula adds relational meaning (inventory is subtracted from current assets, then divided by liabilities), which goes beyond the individual parameter definitions.

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 precisely names the quick (acid-test) ratio and gives its formula, making it instantly clear what the tool calculates. This distinguishes it from the sibling `current-ratio` by explicitly including the inventory subtraction.

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 formula directly indicates when to use this tool (when the acid-test ratio is needed), but it does not explicitly mention alternatives like `current-ratio` or provide exclusion criteria. The context is clear but no 'when-not' guidance is present.

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