calculate_moroccan_profit_foncier

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The description implies it is a pure calculation (no side effects), but does not explicitly state that it is read-only or disclose any other behavioral traits like authentication needs or rate limits. For a calculation tool, the lack of explicit disclosure is acceptable but not ideal.

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 long, with the first sentence front-loading the purpose and output structure. The second sentence is a helpful pointer to related tools. Every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 simplicity (calculation with three input parameters and a clear output schema), the description is largely complete. It explains the purpose and return fields. The only minor gap is that it does not mention the underlying tax assumptions or legal framework, but this is implicit. The presence of an output schema (implied by the return list) reduces the need for additional detail.

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 has 100% coverage with clear parameter descriptions. The description does not add additional meaning to the input parameters beyond what is in the schema, but it does list the expected return fields, which provides context for the output. Baseline is 3 due to high schema coverage, and the description adds marginal value.

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 calculates Moroccan property income tax (profit foncier) and lists the return fields. The verb 'Calculate' and specific resource 'Moroccan property income tax' provide a clear purpose, and the tool is well-differentiated from sibling tax calculators by its focus on Morocco and real estate.

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 indicates the tool is for Moroccan property income tax and directs users to list_bundles for related calculators, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other Morocco tax calculators) or provide prerequisites. While the context is clear, no explicit guidance on exclusions or selection criteria is given.

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