calculate_capital_gains_property

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

The description mentions 'including duration abatements' and lists return values, but it falsely claims 'work cost' as an input, which is not present in the schema. This is a significant misrepresentation. With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure, and the contradiction reduces transparency.

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 sentences and front-loaded with purpose, but it contains an inaccurate mention of 'work cost', which undermines conciseness. Every sentence should be accurate and valuable.

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?

With an output schema indicated, the description's mention of return values (tax due, social charges, net gain) is sufficient. However, it omits details about the duration abatement logic and includes a misleading input, making it incomplete for a complex tax calculation tool.

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 baseline is 3. The description repeats the three schema parameters but adds 'work cost', which is misleading and not part of the actual input schema. It does not provide additional semantic meaning beyond the schema for the actual parameters.

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 it computes French property capital gains tax for sellers of secondary residence, with a specific verb 'Compute' and resource 'French property capital gains tax'. It provides context for use case, though it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'calculate_us_capital_gains'.

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 explicit usage context ('Use for sellers of secondary residence') and references 'list_bundles' for related calculators. However, it does not specify when not to use this tool or mention alternative tools for other scenarios.

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