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

Annotations already confirm it is a read-only, idempotent, non-open-world calculation. The description adds useful output information (results in both l/min and m³/h) that is not available from annotations or an output schema, though it does not explain rounding or region effects.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core calculation and followed by the additional output unit. There is no unnecessary text, and the result fields are stated compactly.

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 simple three-parameter calculator with full schema coverage and annotations, the description is nearly complete. It covers the calculation and both output units; the region parameter is explained by the schema, so no critical gap remains.

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 schema already documents all three parameters fully, including ranges and defaults. The description mentions the diameter and velocity but adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides; baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: calculating volumetric flow (Volumenstrom) in l/min from pipe inner diameter and flow velocity. It is clear what the tool does, though it cannot meaningfully distinguish itself from the opaque sibling IDs.

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 the calculation context, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The context is clear enough for an agent to infer it is a straightforward calculator.

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