treasury_management__fx_forward_rate

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

The formula suggests a deterministic calculation with no side effects, which is transparent. However, it does not disclose input constraints (e.g., positive rates, day count conventions) or whether any implicit assumptions (like simple interest) apply.

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, using a single line with a formula. It is efficient, though a brief clarifying sentence about the output would improve clarity.

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 five parameters, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the description is insufficient. It omits documentation for the optional 'basis' parameter and does not describe the return value or any edge cases.

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?

The description references spot, domestic_rate, foreign_rate, and days in the formula, adding some meaning. But it does not explain the 'basis' parameter at all, and fails to specify units (e.g., percentage vs decimal) or the day count fraction (e.g., days/365).

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 explicitly states the formula for covered interest parity and the resource being computed (forward rate). It distinguishes from sibling tools like cash_position or hedge_pnl which compute different treasury metrics.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only presents the formula, leaving the agent to infer usage context without any directional advice.

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