Calculate what missed calls cost a business

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses what the tool computes (lost revenue, recovery metrics) and mentions specific outputs (recoverable revenue, suggested plan, break-even days, ROI multiple). This adds value, though assumptions (e.g., constant call volume) are not stated.

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 packs all key information without redundancy. It could be slightly more structured (e.g., separating lost revenue and recovery math), but it remains efficient and 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 3 parameters with 100% schema coverage and an output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers both the primary computation and the additional recovery analysis, leaving only minor gaps (e.g., explicit return format, but output schema presumably covers that).

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%, and the description does not add meaning beyond what the schema provides for the three parameters. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents each parameter.

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 revenue lost to missed calls (monthly/yearly) and recovery math, which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings that focus on prompts, demos, hiring decisions, or scripting.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'should_i_hire_a_receptionist'. Usage is implied from the title and description, but no exclusions or context for selection are provided.

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