calculate_debt_service_ratio

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states that the tool calculates and returns values, implying it is a pure read-only operation, but it does not disclose assumptions (e.g., using 35% ratio) or potential edge cases. Adequate but not detailed.

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 very concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the main purpose. It provides return fields and a cross-reference without any wasted words.

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?

For a calculator tool with no annotations, the description lists return fields and hints at the calculation assumption (35% ratio via 'max_monthly_debt_35pct'). The cross-reference to 'list_bundles' adds useful context. Some details about the 'status' field are missing, but overall it is fairly 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?

The input schema already describes both parameters with units and constraints (100% coverage). The description adds context about loan capacity but does not significantly enhance the schema's meaning. Baseline 3 applies.

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 the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Calculate') and resource ('debt-to-income ratio and maximum additional loan capacity'). It also provides the return fields, differentiating it from other financial calculators, and references a related bundle for context.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like calculate_loan_payment or calculate_mortgage. It lacks explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' instructions.

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