calculate_subsidy

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the calculation uses a tiered structure, which hints at the method, but does not explicitly state that the tool is read-only, what the return value looks like, or any limitations (e.g., assumes current scheme rates). For a simple calculator, this is adequate but not highly transparent.

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 that wastes no words. It immediately states the action, target, and key detail (tiered structure).

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 simple with one parameter and no annotations, but there is no output schema, so the description could specify the return format (e.g., subsidy amount in currency). It is mostly complete for a straightforward calculator, but leaves minor ambiguity about output structure.

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 already provides full coverage for the single parameter (capacity_kw) with a description and constraints. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond restating 'system capacity' and referencing the tiered structure. Baseline 3 applies since schema coverage is 100%.

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 clearly identifies the resource ('PM Surya Ghar subsidy') and scope ('given system capacity using the tiered structure'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like calculate_roi or estimate_installation_cost, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 for subsidy calculation based on capacity, but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. It does not state, for example, that it is the appropriate tool when the user asks for subsidy amounts rather than ROI or installation costs.

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