calculate_financial_metrics

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

No annotations exist, so the description must carry the burden. It only lists outputs without disclosing whether the tool is read-only, requires permissions, or has side effects. For a calculation tool, additional context about data dependencies or error handling would improve transparency.

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, concise sentence that communicates the core functionality without extraneous words. Every phrase adds value.

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 no output schema, the description provides minimal information about the return format. The tool's simplicity (zero parameters) makes the description adequate, but it could list the specific metrics returned or note any limitations.

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 has zero parameters, achieving 100% coverage. The description adds no parameter info but implicitly explains what the tool returns. With no parameters, a baseline of 4 is appropriate, as the description clarifies the output beyond just the tool name.

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 computes total monthly/annual spend, savings, and price increases. The verb 'calculate' and resource 'financial metrics' are specific. Sibling tools like 'check_engagement_signals' and 'generate_cancellation_playbook' have distinct focuses, so the tool's purpose is well-differentiated.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool, prerequisites, or when alternatives might be better. This forces the agent to infer context from the tool name and siblings.

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