calculate_capital_gains_property

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It mentions abatements and lists outputs, but lacks disclosures about assumptions, limitations, precision, or edge cases critical for a tax calculation.

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 sentences with clear front-loading. No fluff, but the second sentence adds value. However, the erroneous mention of an extra parameter wastes a bit of space.

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 French property capital gains, the description is too brief. It lacks prerequisites, legal notes, and specifics on abatement calculations. The mention of outputs is helpful, but the missing 'work cost' param and no details on results structure reduce completeness.

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?

The schema covers 3 parameters with full descriptions, but the description mentions 'work cost' as an input, which is not in the schema, creating confusion. It adds meaning for the existing parameters (euros, years) but the inclusion of a non-existent parameter undermines clarity.

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 computes French property capital gains tax with duration abatements, for sellers of secondary residence. It is specific and distinguishes from many sibling calculators, though it does not directly differentiate from other French property tax 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?

It specifies 'use for sellers of secondary residence,' providing clear context. However, it does not state when not to use the tool or list alternative tools beyond referencing list_bundles.

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