calculate_car_lease_vs_buy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states 'Returns total costs and recommendation', lacking details on computation method, side effects, or constraints. This is insufficient for a tool with 6 required parameters.

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 concise (3 sentences) and front-loads the purpose. However, it redundantly lists inputs already covered by the schema, slightly reducing efficiency.

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 tool's complexity (6 required parameters, comparison logic), the description is too brief. 'Returns total costs and recommendation' is vague; the nature of the recommendation and any assumptions are omitted. An output schema exists but the description should still provide decision context.

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?

Although schema descriptions achieve 100% coverage, the description's list of inputs ('car price, lease monthly cost, loan rate, ownership years') is inaccurate. 'Ownership years' is not a parameter, and key parameters like lease_months and residual_value are omitted, potentially misleading the agent.

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 'Compare leasing vs buying a car over the same period' with a specific verb and resource, and explicitly mentions the context 'automotive purchase decisions'. It distinguishes itself from other calculator siblings by focusing on car lease vs buy.

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 advises 'Use for automotive purchase decisions', providing clear context. It also references list_bundles for related calculators, but does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide detailed alternatives.

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