calculate_installment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It does disclose that the calculation uses the Price system and produces fixed installments, which is useful. However, it does not mention the output format, zero-rate behavior, rounding, or whether it only returns the installment value.

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 a single, focused sentence that leads with the action and includes the key method detail. There is no redundant information or filler.

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?

The tool is simple and the schema covers all parameters, but with no output schema and no usage guidance, the description leaves some ambiguity about the exact return value and when to select this tool over similar siblings. It is minimally viable but not fully 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so all three parameters are already well described in the schema. The description adds the broader method context but does not elaborate on parameter meaning or relationships beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific action ('Calcula parcelas') on a specific resource ('financiamento/empréstimo') and adds the precise method ('sistema Price'). This differentiates it from broader siblings like calculate_financing by emphasizing fixed installments under the Price system.

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 gives no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. With siblings like calculate_financing, calculate_compound_interest, and calculate_debt_payoff, an agent would not know which calculation context selects this tool.

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