calculate_emi

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the formula and additional outputs, but does not mention assumptions (e.g., fixed rate, monthly compounding) or limitations. Still sufficiently transparent for standard use.

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, no wasted words. The formula is included concisely, and key outputs are noted. Front-loaded with the core action.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown), the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the core function and additional metrics. Adequate for a financial calculation tool with siblings.

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?

Parameters are clearly named (principal, annual_rate, tenure_years) but the description adds little beyond naming the formula. It does not specify units (e.g., rate as decimal or percentage, tenure in months vs years) or constraints, despite 0% schema coverage.

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 it calculates EMI for a loan, providing the formula and additional outputs like total interest and interest-to-principal ratio. It distinguishes from siblings such as loan_amortization and compare_loans.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like loan_amortization or calculate_prepayment_savings. It implies usage for EMI calculation but lacks guidance on selection criteria.

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