loan_payment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It names the outputs (payment, total interest) but does not describe the return format, precision, or any potential side effects. For a simple calculator tool, this is minimally adequate but lacks detail.

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 sentence that conveys the core purpose without unnecessary words. It is highly concise and front-loaded.

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?

With 4 required parameters and no output schema, the description should ideally clarify the output structure. It names the outputs but does not specify if they are returned as separate values, an object, or a tuple. The tool seems straightforward but could be more complete.

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 100%, so the parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool calculates payment and total interest for a standard fixed-rate amortizing loan. It uses a specific verb 'calculates' and identifies the resource. Among sibling tools which are generic math functions, this tool is distinct in purpose.

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 implies usage context (standard fixed-rate amortizing loan), and the sibling tools are all general math operations, none of which handle loan calculations. The purpose alone is sufficient to guide an agent on when to use this tool, though no explicit when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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