discount_calculator

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

The only behavioral disclosure is the cost ($0.001 USDC via x402), which is useful. However, with no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of safety information; it says nothing about whether the tool modifies data, requires authentication, or what happens on payment failure. This leaves the side-effect profile largely unknown.

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 extremely brief, but brevity here is under-specification, not conciseness. It omits essential information about purpose and parameters, so the single sentence does not earn its place as a useful guide.

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?

This is a financial calculation tool with no output schema and no detailed parameter documentation. The description provides zero context about the calculation performed, required inputs, or expected results, making it impossible for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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 only provides a generic 'params' object wrapper, which is meaningless without knowing the actual parameters. The description adds no information about expected inputs like original price or discount rate. Even though schema coverage is reported as 100%, the schema itself is opaque, and the description fails to compensate.

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 only restates the tool name ('discount calculator') and assigns a broad category ('Finance & Math tool'). It does not specify what the tool computes, such as final price, discount amount, or percentage off. This is a tautology with no functional verb or resource.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling finance calculators (e.g., percentage_calculator, loan_calculator). No scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions are mentioned.

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