find_networth_percentile

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses the data source and optional segments, but does not explain default behavior when across_world is false and no countries are provided, nor the return format. This is adequate but with notable gaps.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and scoping, with no wasted words. It is efficient and easy to parse.

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?

The tool has 6 parameters and no output schema, so the description needs to explain return values and default behavior. It mentions the dataset but does not explain what happens when across_world is false and no countries are given, nor what the output percentile looks like. This is a significant gap for an agent.

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 covers 100% of parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context by mapping 'globally or within specific countries' to across_world/countries and 'segmented by age and gender' to age/gender, but adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema.

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 uses the specific verb 'Find' and clearly identifies the resource: net worth percentile, with scope (global/countries) and optional segments. It is distinct from siblings like calculate_fire_number, which addresses different use cases.

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?

It clearly indicates the tool is for percentile lookups and mentions global vs country scoping, implying when to use it. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or state exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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