fx_carry-trade

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by detailing the outputs (carry return, spot return, total return, annualized P&L breakdown) and confirming it is a calculation tool. No contradictions with annotations.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the purpose, followed by usage guidance and input/output summary. Every sentence is informative and non-redundant, making it efficient for an agent to parse.

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 the tool's moderate complexity (7 parameters, no output schema), the description provides sufficient context: purpose, inputs, and outputs. It does not specify formulas or edge cases, but the schema covers parameter units, and the tool is a standard financial calculation, so the description is adequately 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%, providing basic descriptions for all 7 parameters. The description adds context by mapping parameters to carry trade concepts ('high-yield and low-yield rates, entry spot rate, exit spot rate'), enhancing understanding beyond the schema alone.

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 the tool performs 'Currency carry trade P&L decomposition', a specific verb-resource combination. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (all other FX tools have different purposes) and explicitly lists inputs and outputs, leaving no ambiguity about its function.

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 includes 'Use when analyzing carry trade P&L decomposition', providing explicit guidance on when to invoke this tool. Although it does not mention alternatives or when not to use, the sibling tools are all distinct, so no exclusion is necessary.

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