Landed Cost Calculator

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the output type ('true per-unit cost') and does not disclose the calculation formula, assumptions, or that it is a side-effect-free deterministic calculation.

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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though the word 'True' adds little substance and the brevity contributes to under-specification in other dimensions.

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 six parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the one-sentence description is insufficient. It does not explain the formula, what output the agent should expect (e.g., a number), or whether all costs are divided by quantity.

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?

While 'per-unit' and 'including freight and duty' hint that costs are aggregated and divided by quantity, the description does not mention insurance, otherFees, productCost, or the role of quantity, leaving most of the six parameters undocumented despite 0% schema description coverage.

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 identifies the tool's purpose as computing true per-unit cost including freight and duty, which distinguishes it from sibling calculators such as reorder-point-calculator. However, it lacks a direct verb and does not explicitly state that it calculates, relying on the title and noun phrase.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It neither names sibling calculators nor states when not to use it, leaving the usage context implied solely by the name and phrase 'freight and duty.'

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