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

No annotations provided, so description must cover behavioral traits. The description implies it is a safe, stateless calculation with no side effects, but does not explicitly state idempotency, data handling, or lack of side effects. Adequate but minimal.

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: first states the primary function, second lists return fields and a useful reference. No fluff, efficient.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (4 parameters, derived outputs) and existence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's scope. It mentions key components (PMI, property tax, insurance) and provides a cross-reference. Lacks nuance on edge cases or limitations but sufficient.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions 'home_price' and 'down_payment' but does not add new semantic details beyond the schema. No enrichment of parameter meaning.

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 clearly states it calculates a US mortgage with PMI, property tax, and insurance, differentiating it from generic mortgage calculators (e.g., calculate_mortgage). It also references list_bundles for related tools.

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?

Provides clear context for US-specific mortgage calculation and hints at alternative tools via list_bundles. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but the purpose is well-defined.

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