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

The description discloses it is an exposure model and not FCA-regulated advice, adding behavioral context beyond the schema. Without annotations, it carries the full burden but does not detail safety constraints or side effects.

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 purpose, no wasted words. Efficient and 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?

Covers the core functionality and caveats well for a 6-parameter tool with no output schema. Could hint more at output format but is 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 provides 100% parameter descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds overarching context (e.g., why pensionValue matters) but does not enhance individual parameter semantics beyond schema.

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 the tool shows the Inheritance Tax impact of the April 2027 pension change, comparing IHT before and after. It distinguishes itself from siblings like calculate_iht by specifying the 2027 context and emphasizing it is only an exposure model.

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 use for 2027 pension impact but does not explicitly mention when to use alternatives like calculate_iht. It provides context (exposure only) but lacks exclusion criteria or direct comparisons.

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