calculate_sukanya_samriddhi

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states deposits for 15 years, maturity in 21 years, and annual compounding, but does not disclose assumptions like constant interest rate or any limitations. This is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 two concise sentences, front-loading the purpose and key details. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 output schema exists (not shown), the description covers the essential aspects: what is calculated, for whom, and the terms. It could be improved by noting the assumption of constant interest rate, but for a simple tool it is largely complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description explains deposit_years (15), maturity_years (21), and annual_deposit (implied). It does not explicitly describe annual_rate, though 'annual compounding' implies its existence. This adds significant meaning beyond the raw 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 explicitly states the tool calculates Sukanya Samriddhi Yojana maturity for a girl child, specifying its use for daughter education/marriage savings. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like calculate_ppf by naming the specific scheme.

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 provides clear context for when to use (daughter education/marriage savings, SSY corpus) but does not explicitly mention when not to use or suggest alternatives among siblings.

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