calc_mortgage

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully explain behavior. It only states what the tool does but not how (e.g., formula assumptions like monthly compounding, fixed rate) or what the output looks like. This lack of detail limits transparency.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words, making it concise. However, it is arguably under-specified for a tool with three required parameters. Proper conciseness balances brevity with sufficient information.

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 the tool's simplicity (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value, typical use cases, or examples. A minimally complete description would include what the output represents.

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%, so the description should add meaning to parameters. It does not mention any of the three parameters (principal, annual_rate, years) or clarify ambiguities like whether annual_rate is a percentage or decimal. The agent must infer from names alone.

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 verb 'calculate' and the resource 'monthly mortgage repayment'. It is specific and easily distinguishes this tool from other calculator siblings like calc_bmi or calc_compound_interest.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not mention when to use this tool, prerequisites, or alternatives. For a simple calculator, some guidance on typical scenarios or necessary inputs would be helpful.

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