predictive_burn_rate__apply_collections_curve

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It explains the curve constraint (sum <=1) and residual as bad debt, which is good. However, it does not address idempotency, side effects, or safety. It is a computation, so likely safe, but not explicitly stated.

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, highly concise. No redundant information. Front-loaded with main purpose, then curve detail. 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 no output schema and 2 parameters with 0% schema coverage, the description should provide complete context. It lacks details on input format for invoiced_by_month and expected output. Incomplete for effective use.

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% with no parameter descriptions. The description adds partial meaning by mentioning 'invoiced_by_month' and 'curve' in context, but does not specify the expected format (e.g., JSON structure) for either parameter. Inadequate compensation.

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 the tool converts invoicing into expected cash receipts using a lag distribution. It distinguishes from sibling burn rate tools by specifying the conversion process and explains the curve format.

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 implies usage by stating the function, but does not explicitly provide when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No mention of alternatives or exclusions.

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