calculate_debt_capacity

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the return object structure, but does not mention side effects, permissions, or edge cases. The tool appears read-only and non-destructive, but this is inferred rather than stated.

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, front-loading the purpose and return format, then directing to related tools. Every sentence is concise and informative with no redundancy.

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 presence of an output schema, the description appropriately summarizes return values. It covers purpose, key rule, and related tools, but lacks behavioral transparency details. For a calculator tool, this is reasonably 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 description coverage is 100%, and the input parameter descriptions are clear. The tool description adds minimal value beyond the schema, merely naming the rule and return object. The parameter meanings are adequately conveyed by the schema alone.

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 states the tool calculates maximum loan capacity using the French HCSF 35% debt ratio rule, and lists the return object fields. It references 'list_bundles' for related calculators, but does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools that may perform similar calculations.

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 a French regulatory context via the HCSF mention and directs to list_bundles for related 'immobilier' calculators, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance compared to alternatives.

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