calculate_compound_interest

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states the tool is a universal mathematical calculation with no side effects, but does not disclose the output format, return value details, or edge case behavior (e.g., zero principal). 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 concise sentences plus examples, front-loaded with the core purpose. No wasted words; every sentence serves a function.

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 compound interest calculator with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It includes purpose, scope, and usage examples. Minor gap: no explicit description of the return value, but it is implied.

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 does not add additional semantic meaning beyond the schema descriptions and examples, which are helpful but not necessary for parameter understanding.

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?

Description clearly states 'Compute the future value of a single lump-sum investment at compound interest', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings by indicating 'single lump-sum' (vs SIP) and 'Universal — no country specifics' (vs country-specific calculators).

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?

Description provides examples of queries to illustrate usage but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus sibling tools (e.g., SIP calculator, loan payment). No when-not-to-use guidance is given.

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