calculate_solar_capacity

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It clearly indicates a read-only calculation, but does not disclose formula assumptions, output format, or limitations. The word 'recommended' hints at a heuristic, but no further detail is given. This is adequate but not rich.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every word earns its place. It avoids unnecessary detail while conveying the essential inputs.

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 tool is a simple calculation with no output schema, and all parameters are documented in the schema. The description provides the purpose and inputs but lacks detail on return values, edge cases, or relationship to sibling tools. Adequate for a straightforward tool, but not fully 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description names three of four parameters (monthly bill, tariff, roof area) but omits the optional monthly_units. It adds minimal semantic value beyond the schema, so a 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 uses a specific verb ('Calculate') and resource ('recommended solar system capacity'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that handle irradiance, costs, subsidies, ROI, etc. It leaves no ambiguity about what the tool computes.

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 states clear context: the tool is used to calculate capacity based on monthly bill, tariff, and roof area. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the inputs imply a specific scenario, making it clear when this tool is appropriate relative to siblings.

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