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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. The single phrase 'Overall Equipment Effectiveness for production' gives no information about inputs, calculation method, return values, or side effects. It fails to disclose any behavioral traits.

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 extremely concise, with no wasted words, but it is under-specified. A single noun phrase does not provide enough structure to be effective, making it closer to a label than a helpful description.

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 calculator tool with five parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is drastically incomplete. It does not explain the OEE formula, the meaning/units of parameters, or the returned result, leaving the agent without sufficient context to invoke the tool correctly.

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 0% and the tool description does not mention any of the five parameters. The parameter names like 'goodUnits' and 'downtimeMin' are somewhat self-explanatory, but the description adds no meaning beyond the input schema and fails to compensate for the total lack of parameter descriptions.

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 'Overall Equipment Effectiveness for production' identifies the domain metric but lacks an explicit verb like 'calculate' or 'compute'. It is clearer than a tautology but does not clearly state the action or distinguish from sibling calculators beyond context.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention specific scenarios, prerequisites, or contrast with any sibling tools, leaving the agent without usage context.

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