calculate_us_capital_gains

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output structure and clarifies that holding period determines tax rate (short-term vs long-term). However, it does not cover error handling, assumptions (e.g., federal only), or other behavioral details.

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, with two sentences that front-load the main purpose and then provide a pointer to related tools. Every sentence adds value without 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?

The description is adequate for a simple calculator tool. It specifies the return format and references a bundle for related calculators. However, it lacks explanation of assumptions (e.g., only federal tax, no state adjustments) and potential errors.

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% description coverage, so the description adds little beyond that. It mentions the relationship between holding period and tax rates, but this is already implied by the schema's description of holding_period_months.

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 calculates US capital gains tax, distinguishes between short-term and long-term rates, and specifies the return format. The verb 'calculate' and resource 'US capital gains tax' are explicit, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 use for US capital gains tax calculation but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It references list_bundles for related calculators, but no alternatives or exclusions are given.

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