Calculate max affordable home price

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

Annotations already cover readOnly and idempotent, but the description adds 'No network — pure local math', clarifying it is a deterministic, side-effect-free calculation. It also discloses the output structure (binding constraint, PITI breakdown), which goes beyond annotations. No contradiction found.

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, front-loaded with the primary action and rule, then inputs and outputs. Every sentence adds value—no fluff. The 'No network' note is a meaningful behavioral distinction, not filler.

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 tool with 10 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the purpose, inputs, outputs, and a behavioral note. It gives an agent all information needed to decide whether to call it and what to expect. Nothing critical is missing.

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 description coverage is 60%, but the tool description lists all input categories (income, debts, down payment, interest rate, property tax, insurance, HOA, term) and adds meaning to parameters lacking schema descriptions (e.g., down_payment, insurance_annual, hoa_monthly). It also explains the 28/36 DTI context, which enriches parameter understanding.

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?

States a specific verb ('Solve for'), resource ('maximum home price'), and the governing rule (28/36 DTI). It clearly differentiates from siblings like zillow_calculate_mortgage by focusing on affordability rather than payments, and notes 'No network — pure local math' to distinguish from network-based tools.

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 implicitly conveys when to use it (when an agent needs to determine max affordable home price), but it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it. It gives clear context via inputs/outputs, but lacks explicit exclusions. Still, the purpose is unambiguous enough for an agent to route correctly.

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