sacco_loan_guide

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States it covers loan types and process but does not disclose if it is read-only, if results are limited (DEMO), or any side effects. Insufficient for agent to understand behavior.

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?

Very short at one sentence, but includes ambiguous 'DEMO'. Not excessively verbose, but could be more informative without adding length.

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?

Output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but description is too vague about input parameters and usage. Does not compensate for missing parameter semantics or usage guidance.

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 0% (no descriptions in schema). Description does not mention loan_type or sacco_name parameters, leaving their meaning and defaults unexplained. Fails to add value beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states it covers SACCO loan types, eligibility, and process in Kenya. Differentiates from siblings like sacco_finder (finding SACCOS) and cooperative_benefits (benefits). However, 'DEMO' suggests incompleteness, slightly reducing clarity.

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?

Implied usage for loan information, but no explicit guidance on when to use versus alternatives. No exclusions or context provided. Sibling tools exist but no differentiation is offered.

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