Compute Fiscal Year

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

Annotations provide idempotentHint=true. Description adds that it creates the fiscal year if nonexistent, discloses depreciation capping and carryforward, and states amounts in euros. No contradiction with annotations.

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, information-dense sentence that lists components, side effect, and currency. 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?

No output schema, but description enumerates return components (recettes, charges, amortissements, etc.). Does not mention prerequisites or behavior if year already exists, but sufficient for a complex compute tool given context.

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 has one integer parameter 'year' with 0% description coverage. Description mentions 'pour une année donnée', making the parameter's purpose clear from context, compensating for lack of explicit parameter description.

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 'Calcule' and the resource 'résultat fiscal complet d'un exercice LMNP pour une année donnée', listing specific components (recettes, charges, amortissements, etc.). It distinguishes from siblings like compute_depreciation and compute_tva by being comprehensive.

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?

The description implies the tool should be used to compute full fiscal results, possibly after data entry, and notes it creates the year if missing. No explicit when-not or alternatives, but sibling tools like get_fiscal_year and compute_depreciation provide context.

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