Parse Lightyear Capital Gains

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world, so safety profile is covered. Description adds the FIFO computation detail and the output fields, which is useful context, but does not disclose error behavior on malformed CSVs or what is returned beyond a summary.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the operation, zero filler. Every clause earns its place.

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 read-only parse tool with full schema coverage and annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It omits output shape and error handling, which an agent would benefit from given no output schema exists.

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%, and the schema itself specifies the mutually-exclusive file_path/file_ref constraint. The description adds no parameter meaning at all. Baseline 3 is correct when the schema fully documents parameters.

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?

Clear verb+resource: 'Parse a Lightyear Capital Gains Statement CSV'. Specifies FIFO method and outputs (cost basis, proceeds, realized capital gains). Does not differentiate from sibling parse_lightyear_statement, but the resource scope is specific enough.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, no alternative named. The agent is not told when this tool should be selected over parse_lightyear_statement or book_lightyear_trades.

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