math_loan_calculator

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool's core functions (calculating payment, interest, schedule) but does not mention behavioral traits like read-only nature, required permissions, rate limits, or side effects. The reference to 'describe_tool' suggests more info exists, but standalone transparency is limited.

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 short (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core action. The 'Menu ID' part is slightly redundant with the name, but overall it is efficient. Every sentence adds value, though the first sentence could be slightly cleaner.

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 tool's complexity (five required parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimal. It lacks parameter details, output format, and behavioral context. The reference to 'describe_tool' indicates more info is needed, making it incomplete for standalone 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description provides no explanation of the five parameters (operation, principal, annualRatePercent, termYears, extraMonthlyPayment). It does not add meaning beyond the schema, which is insufficient for a tool with five required parameters.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Calculate monthly payment, total interest, and full amortization schedule.' It uses a specific verb (calculate) and resource (loan amortization), and distinguishes itself from sibling calculators by focusing on loans, not general math or other financial calculations.

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 mentions support for 'extra monthly payments and zero-rate loans,' which gives context for when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives among siblings, though the mention of using 'describe_tool' for full guidance implies additional context.

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