calculate_finops_roi

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the word 'estimated,' signaling that this is a calculation rather than a live billing query, but it does not disclose assumptions, limitations, or what data feeds the estimate.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and outcome, with no filler or redundancy. Every phrase contributes meaning, and the jargon is appropriate to the tool's domain.

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 description explains what the tool calculates but does not describe the return value or output shape, and there is no output schema to compensate. For a tool with only two parameters this is not fatal, but an agent would benefit from knowing what form the ROI estimate takes.

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 100%, so both cloudProvider and monthlyCloudSpend are already documented structurally. The description does not add extra parameter-level meaning such as required inputs, allowed provider values, or how monthlyCloudSpend factors into the calculation.

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 uses a specific verb ('Calculate') with a specific resource ('estimated cloud cost savings and ROI') and names the exact mechanisms involved (Karpenter bin-packing, spot orchestration, Graviton migration). It is clearly distinct from the sibling tools, which are all skills/profile/content tools.

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 when this tool is relevant: when a user wants FinOps/ROI estimates for Karpenter, spot, or Graviton. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the sibling tools are unrelated enough that confusion is unlikely.

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