condosplit_split

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does reveal the conditional behavior of returning available coordinates when payment_coordinates_id is omitted, and frames the operation as compute-and-return. However, it does not mention potential persistence through 'save' or any side effects, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences. The first states the main function and output; the second adds the important conditional behavior. No filler or redundant information.

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 covers the main purpose, the output summary, and the conditional coordinate-selection workflow. Since there is no output schema, some detail about the exact response structure is absent, but the description is sufficient for a moderately complex tool with well-documented parameters.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a bit of contextual meaning for payment_coordinates_id, but that behavior is already documented in the parameter's own description. No significant semantic value is added beyond the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Calcola') and resource ('suddivisione di una spesa condominiale tra gli interni'), and states the output: a detailed summary with each unit's share. It is clearly distinguished from sibling tools about coordinates, history, and initialization.

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 core use case is clear from the first sentence. It also gives actionable guidance: if payment_coordinates_id is not specified and saved coordinates exist, the tool returns the list so the user can choose which to include. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is not misleading.

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