company_valuation__enterprise_value

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. However, it does not mention any behavioral traits (e.g., read-only, data requirements, error conditions). The token description offers no transparency.

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 extremely short, but this is due to under-specification rather than efficiency. It lacks all necessary detail, so it fails the conciseness ideal of being appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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?

With 3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations, and a one-word description, the tool is missing critical information for correct invocation. Given its complexity as a financial computation, it is severely incomplete.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any parameter. The terms 'fcfs', 'wacc', and 'terminal_value' are not defined, leaving an AI agent without needed context to correctly invoke the tool.

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 '[company-valuation] enterprise_value' is a tautology that restates the tool name without specifying any action or resource. It does not indicate what the tool does (e.g., computes enterprise value from cash flows). Among siblings like company_valuation__equity_value, it provides no differentiation.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description gives no context on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as company_valuation__npv or terminal_value_gordon. There is no statement of prerequisites or exclusions.

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