aro_computation__initial_aro

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the calculation type but does not reveal traits like idempotency, error handling, 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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. However, it is too brief and could benefit from additional context without losing conciseness.

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 4 required parameters, no output schema, and a calculation tool, the description should explain the formula or expected behavior more thoroughly. It is incomplete for an agent to reliably invoke the tool.

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 0%, and the description only hints at inflation and discounting without explaining each parameter's role. The names (current_cost, inflation, discount, years) are suggestive but insufficient for precise usage.

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 computes the present value (PV) of an inflated future restoration cost, specifying the verb (PV) and the resource (restoration cost). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'accretion_schedule' and 'revision_adjustment' by focusing on the initial ARO calculation.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to apply inflation and discounting or prerequisites. The description lacks context for usage decisions.

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