pension_annual_allowance

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

The description discloses the calculation logic and constraints (taper, floor, carry-forward), which adds behavioral context beyond the parameter names. However, it does not specify the return value or side effects, and no annotations exist to fill 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?

Two dense sentences with no extraneous words. Key information is front-loaded and efficiently communicated.

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 of the tool (taper and carry-forward) and lack of output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not describe the output format, return type, or edge cases (e.g., when floor applies).

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 only 33% (priorYears has an explanation). The description adds meaning to adjustedIncome and thresholdIncome by referencing them in the taper formula, but does not fully define each parameter or how they are used, leaving gaps.

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 the pension annual allowance taper and carry-forward, specifying the formula and rules. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools which cover ISAs, inheritance tax, projections, portfolio analysis, and overall tax.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only explains the calculation, implying its use for pension allowance but does not provide context or exclusions.

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