calculate_gold_nisab

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the core calculation (85 grams multiplied by the given price) but does not mention return format, rounding, error handling, or the role of the currency parameter. This is partially transparent but leaves some behavioral details unspecified.

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 is front-loaded with the action (Return) and the object (Zakat Nisab threshold). There is no filler or repetition, making it appropriately concise.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the main purpose but omits the role of the currency parameter and does not describe the exact return type. This leaves minor gaps in completeness.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It references gold_price_per_gram as 'given price' but does not explain the currency parameter at all, leaving its purpose ambiguous. The property names are fairly self-explanatory, but the description adds minimal meaning beyond them.

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 verb 'Return' and the resource 'Zakat Nisab threshold', and specifies the basis: 85 grams of gold at the given price. This distinguishes it from the sibling tool calculate_silver_nisab, which would use silver instead.

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 provides clear context that this tool is for gold-based nisab calculation based on a user-supplied gold price. Although it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the specificity makes the appropriate use case evident.

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