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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden, and it adds meaningful details: the specific 2026 exemption threshold and marginal rate. The phrase 'includes marital deduction' also tells the agent how spousal inheritance factors into the calculation. It still omits potential caveats like state taxes or how the exemption interacts with deductions, but it is far from a bare summary.

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 one dense, front-loaded sentence that covers what the tool does, the relevant exemption, the rate, and a key deduction behavior. Every clause earns its place with no filler.

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 two-parameter calculator with no output schema, the description provides enough context: the computation domain, tax year assumption, exemption amount, rate, and marital deduction behavior. It does not describe return formatting, but the calculation intent is clear and low-risk.

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%, so the schema already documents both 'estateValue and spousalInheritance. The description does not materially add meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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 names a clear verb and resource: 'Calculate federal estate tax.' It goes beyond the tool name by specifying the 2026 exemption amount, the 40% rate, and marital deduction, which distinguishes it from the many calculate_* siblings in the list.

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 intended use is implied clearly by the tool name and first sentence: this is for computing federal estate tax. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it, or how it differs from related tax calculators. The description gives context for use but no exclusions or alternative routing.

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