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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds domain context (French inheritance tax) and enumerates return fields, but does not go beyond the output schema or annotations in any meaningful behavioral way.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, the return fields are listed compactly, and the bundle pointer is last. No sentence is wasted, and the structure makes the tool's scope immediately clear.

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 100% schema coverage, full annotations, and an output schema, the description gives adequate purpose and domain context. The main gap is the lack of selection guidance versus other French tax tools, but the core information needed to invoke the tool correctly is present.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema already documents amount as euros and relationship with four enum values. The description adds no syntax, format, or constraint information beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 (Calculate) and a precisely scoped resource (French inheritance tax / droits de succession), which distinguishes it from siblings like calculate_french_income_tax and calculate_property_transfer_tax. It also names the two calculation inputs (relationship and amount).

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. The sentence 'See list_bundles for related finance-france calculators' points to a bundle listing but does not help an agent choose between this tool and sibling tax calculators.

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