finance_lbo_model

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

Discloses that the tool builds and outputs a model, but does not explain side effects such as persistence, overwriting, or destructive actions; annotations indicate destructiveHint=true, so more disclosure would be needed.

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 compact, front-loads the core action, and organizes parameter explanations in a clear list without extraneous text.

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?

Covers purpose, outputs, and all parameters, which is enough to invoke correctly, though it omits usage context and side-effect details.

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 Args block explains all five parameters, but it labels target_company as required while the schema marks it optional with a null default, creating a misleading contradiction.

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?

States a specific verb ('Build'), a specific resource ('leveraged buyout model'), and lists concrete outputs (sources & uses, debt schedule, IRR/MOIC waterfall, sensitivity tables, memo), making its intent unmistakable and distinct from sibling tools.

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 use when an LBO model is needed but gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, when-not-to-use conditions, or alternatives among the large sibling toolset.

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