Analyze Multifamily Deal

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows it's a safe, read-only operation. The description adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., side effects, auth requirements, rate limits), relying on the annotations to carry the safety profile.

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 purpose and outputs, followed by usage context. Every sentence earns its place; no unnecessary 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?

Given there is no output schema, the description lists all key return metrics and gives usage context. It doesn't explain edge cases, but since the annotations confirm read-only/idempotent behavior and the schema covers parameters, it is fairly complete for a straightforward analysis tool.

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 100% with every parameter having a description, including defaults for assumptions and the fallback for monthly_expenses. The description adds little beyond listing outputs; it does not elaborate on parameter syntax or constraints, so the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 analyzes multifamily deals, lists specific outputs (cap rate, cash-on-cash, DSCR, IRR, DFP Score, max offer price, full financial projections), and includes usage context. This distinguishes it from siblings like score_deal and reverse_calc through the breadth of outputs.

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?

Explicitly states when to use it: 'when someone asks about analyzing a property, evaluating a deal, or running the numbers.' However, it does not provide exclusions or mention alternatives like score_deal or market_data, so it's clear on triggers but not on when NOT to use it.

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