calculate_x_ads_revenue

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the estimation nature and the key driver (reply density), and implies it is a read-only calculation. It does not mention side effects, but for a calculation tool, this is adequate.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and each sentence adds essential context (mechanism, eligibility). No wasted words.

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 calculation tool, the description covers purpose, mechanism, and eligibility. However, it does not specify the output format (e.g., estimated monthly payout in USD), assuming user inference from parameter defaults. Still, it is mostly 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 description coverage is 100% (all three parameters have descriptions in the schema). The tool description adds contextual information about reply density as a lever but does not add new parameter-specific details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 estimates X Premium Creator Ads Revenue Share payout from impressions, explaining the mechanism (ads in replies) and eligibility. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools, none of which perform revenue estimation.

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 usage context: estimating revenue share with explicit eligibility requirements (X Premium, 500 followers, 25M impressions). However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use this tool or suggest alternative tools, though none exist among siblings.

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