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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and a closed-world tool; the description adds value beyond that by stating the computed outputs (current I [A] and power P [W]), which matters because there is no output schema. It omits any note on the meaning or effect of the region parameter on the result.

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?

A single compact sentence plus a short result line; the formulas and outputs are front-loaded with no filler. Minor redundancy between 'Ohmsches Gesetz Rechner online' and 'berechnen' keeps it from a 5.

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?

With no output schema, the description correctly fills that gap by naming the returned values and their units. For a simple three-parameter pure calculator that is nearly sufficient; only the role of the region parameter is left unexplained.

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, but the description goes further by defining the mathematical relationship between the voltage and resistance inputs and the derived outputs. The one gap is that the region enum (DE/CH) is never mentioned or explained in connection with the calculation.

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 names the specific operation (Ohm's law calculation) and the exact formulas applied (I = U / R, P = U · I), and states the returned quantities. It is clear but does not distinguish itself from any sibling; the sibling names (bot_010 etc.) are opaque, so no differentiation is possible or offered.

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?

Usage is implied by 'Rechner online berechnen' — call this when you need current and power from voltage and resistance. There is no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance and no named alternative for related electrical calculations.

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