Compare Savvly vs Alternative Product

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly, idempotent, and not destructive. The description adds that the tool 'renders an interactive comparison widget' and that facts come from Savvly's own records with primary sources, providing useful behavioral context beyond 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?

Two sentences pack purpose, usage, parameter guidance, and behavioral context with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the key action.

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 simple tool with one parameter, rich annotations, and an output schema (implied), the description is complete. It covers what, when, parameter hint, and behavioral aspects.

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 covers the single parameter with enum values and description. The description adds value by explaining the special value 'all' for a full matrix, which is not apparent from 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 'Get a structured comparison between Savvly and another retirement product type', specifying the verb and resource. It lists example alternatives and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_savvly_product_info'.

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 explicitly says 'use it whenever the user compares Savvly to annuities, target-date funds... or asks how Savvly stacks up', providing clear usage context. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the positive guidance is strong.

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