Investment Growth Projection

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

No annotations, but description discloses outputs and optional features. For a stateless calculator, this is sufficient; no contradictions or missing critical behavioral traits.

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: first defines action and output, second provides usage context. No fluff, front-loaded, every sentence earns 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?

Lists return values and mentions inflation adjustment and schedule, but no output schema. For a financial calculator, this is fairly complete; a bit more detail on the schedule format could improve, but not required for clarity.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. Description adds minimal per-parameter detail beyond schema, tying parameters to overall calculation but not enriching individual parameter meanings.

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?

Explicitly states it projects investment growth with compounding and contributions, lists return values (future value, total contributed, interest earned, real value, schedule), and provides a clear use-case question.

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?

Clear context: 'how much will my investing turn into?'. Does not explicitly mention when not to use or suggest alternatives among sibling tools, but the usage context is well-defined.

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