gta-payback-calculator

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses that the calculation uses a method's $/hr and produces hours/runs, which is moderately transparent. However, it does not explain whether it uses user-provided or hardcoded $/hr, or any assumptions or limitations.

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 sentence that conveys purpose, scope, and output without filler. Every word is necessary, and the key action is front-loaded.

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 simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description adequately defines the input-output relationship. It mentions that output includes 'hours/runs to recoup'. However, it could be more explicit about the return format or the need for a method with known $/hr, which would make it 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% (both parameters have descriptions). The description adds minimal meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies that buyIn is the property cost (optional, falls back to method's buy-in) and method is an identifier. This contributes marginal value, so score is at baseline 3.

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's purpose: estimating how long a GTA Online property pays for itself in hours/runs based on a method's earnings rate. It uses a specific verb ('estimate') and resource ('payback time for property'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like gta-sell-calculator or gta-money-plan.

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 wanting to know payback time but provides no explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives (e.g., if you want overall earnings plan, use gta-money-plan). No when-not-to-use or prerequisites are mentioned.

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