dupont

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, indicating a safe, non-destructive operation. The description does not add behavioral details beyond being a decomposition computation. It does not contradict annotations.

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 a single, well-structured sentence with no wasted words. It conveys the core purpose and optional mode efficiently, earning 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?

The description explains inputs and optional mode but does not specify the output format or interpretation. Given no output schema, this is a gap. However, for a simple numerical decomposition, the context is partially adequate.

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% with detailed parameter descriptions. The description adds conceptual meaning by explaining the decomposition formula (margen × rotación × apalancamiento) and optional mode, which the schema alone does not convey. This enhances understanding beyond the schema.

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 performs DuPont decomposition of ROE into 3 factors (margin, turnover, leverage) with an optional 5-factor mode. It distinguishes the two modes and uses a specific verb ('Descomposición') and resource ('ROE'). Among sibling tools, none explicitly target DuPont analysis, making it unique.

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 clear guidance on when to use the 5-factor version ('si se entrega EBIT y UAI'). However, it lacks explicit instructions on when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. The context is clear for the intended use case.

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