Stack Savings Calculator

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It does not mention that the tool is a read-only calculation, the meaning of the inputs, or the output format. The phrase 'See what... saves' implies a result but not how it's produced.

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 8-word sentence, making it concise and free of fluff. However, it is under-specified to the point of being a tagline rather than a functional description.

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?

For a tool with two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not define the input semantics, the nature of the result, or how this calculator differs from its many siblings. The schema partially covers 'selected' but the overall tool usage remains unclear.

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 schema covers 50% of parameters (selected has a description; users does not). The description adds nothing about parameters. It does not explain what 'users' represents (likely seat count for pricing) or how 'selected' interacts with the calculation. The default values and constraints are in the schema, but the semantic meaning is missing.

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 uses the vague verb 'see' rather than 'calculate' or 'estimate', and frames the tool as a value proposition rather than a clear function. It does mention the resource (consolidating tools into Odoo) and differentiates from sibling cost calculators by focusing on savings, but the phrasing is imprecise.

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 other Odoo calculators in the sibling set (e.g., odoo-roi-calculator, odoo-total-cost-of-ownership-calculator). There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative mentions.

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