tax_efficient_investing__tax_equivalent_yield

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

No annotations provided. The description does not disclose behavioral traits such as input format (decimal vs percentage), formula used, or return value characteristics. For a tool with no annotations, this lack of detail is inadequate.

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 very concise (one sentence) and front-loaded with the category. However, it is too brief, leaving out necessary details, so it does not fully earn its place.

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 the simple two-parameter input and no output schema, the description should explain units and formulas. It fails to do so, leaving the user guessing about input formats (e.g., decimal or percentage). Incomplete for a tool that requires precise inputs.

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%. The description does not clarify the meaning or format of the two parameters (tax_free_yield, marginal_tax_rate). It merely repeats the tool's purpose without adding semantic value beyond parameter names.

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 what the tool calculates: 'Gross yield a taxable bond must offer to match a tax-free bond.' This is a specific verb (calculate equivalent yield) and resource (bond yield), and it distinguishes from sibling tools like after_tax_future_value or roth_vs_traditional.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., tax_free_future_value). No mention of prerequisites, assumptions, or scenarios where this calculation is appropriate.

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