analyze_financial_ratios

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

No annotations provided, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions the calculations and that it includes 'assessments and benchmarks', but does not explain side effects, permissions, rate limits, or output format. The tool is likely read-only, but this is not stated.

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 concise (two sentences) and front-loads the key ratios. However, it could be slightly improved by structuring the list for readability.

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 complexity (7 parameters, no schema descriptions, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the output schema (though one exists) or provide enough context for correct invocation.

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 0%, yet the description provides no information about the 7 required parameters. It does not map parameters to ratios or explain expected input ranges/units, leaving the agent to infer from titles 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 states the verb 'calculate' and the resource 'key financial health ratios', listing specific ratios (Savings, Debt-to-Income, etc.). It clearly distinguishes from single-ratio tools like calculate_debt_to_income, though it may overlap with financial_health_check.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., financial_health_check), prerequisites, or when not to use it. The description lacks any usage context.

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