calculate_sip_needed

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states the high-level operation. It does not disclose underlying assumptions like compounding frequency or periodic nature of SIP, which are important for accurate 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?

The description is extremely concise with two short sentences, no redundant information, and front-loaded purpose. Every word serves a clear function.

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?

For a simple three-parameter calculation tool with an output schema, the description covers the main purpose but omits details like compounding frequency and edge cases. It is minimally adequate but could be more informative.

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%, and the description only mentions parameter names in context without specifying units, formats, or constraints. For example, 'annual_return' could be a percentage or decimal, and 'target_amount' lacks currency context.

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 tool calculates monthly SIP needed to reach a target corpus and explicitly calls it an inverse SIP calculation, distinguishing it from siblings like calculate_sip_returns which does the forward computation.

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 usage when you have a target amount and need the monthly investment, and the 'inverse SIP' phrasing hints at differentiation from forward SIP calculators, though it does not explicitly list alternatives or use cases.

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