temperature_converterConvert a value between temperature units. Units: °C (Celsius), °F (Fahrenheit), K (Kelvin), °R (Rankine). Calculation runs on smart-tools.xyz.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| to | Yes | Target unit id | |
| from | Yes | Source unit id | |
| value | Yes | Amount to convert | |
| locale | No | Language for source_url (en, de, es, fr, it, nl, uk) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the calculation runs on smart-tools.xyz, which is a relevant fact. However, it does not describe the output format, error behavior, or any data handling details. For a simple conversion tool, this is acceptable but lacks depth.
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, consisting of two short sentences plus a unit list. There is no redundancy or filler. Every sentence serves a purpose: stating the operation, listing units, and providing a note about the execution environment.
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 tool is simple and stateless. The description plus schema provides enough information for an agent to use it correctly. The optional 'locale' parameter is not explained in the description, but the schema covers it with a description. Output format is not specified, but no output schema exists, and for a converter it is likely a simple value. Slightly more detail on expected output or use cases would make it more complete.
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 provides 100% coverage of all parameters with descriptions, including enums for 'from' and 'to'. The description lists the unit symbols, which supplements the schema but does not add significant additional meaning beyond what the schema already 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 clearly states the tool's function: 'Convert a value between temperature units' and lists the specific supported units (°C, °F, K, °R). This makes the purpose explicit and naturally differentiates it from other unit converters like length or speed converters.
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 clear context that this tool is for temperature conversions and lists the supported units. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. The guidance is implied but not explicitly stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools are clearly distinct, but there are notable overlaps. 'hash_generator' and 'file_hash' effectively do the same thing (SHA hashing of text), and several CSV/TSV converters (csv_to_json, csv_to_sql, table_to_csv, markdown_table) have similar input handling, though outputs differ. The sheer number of converters is clear, but these near-duplicates create some ambiguity.
Names follow a generally consistent pattern: lowercase with underscores, often ending in 'converter', 'calculator', or 'generator'. A few names like 'base64', 'lorem_ipsum', and 'transliteration' deviate from the suffix pattern, but the naming style is uniform and predictable overall.
With 73 tools, this server is far over the typical well-scoped range. While the broad utility-toolkit purpose might justify a larger set, 73 is unwieldy and pushes well into 'too many' territory, making it harder for an agent to select the right tool efficiently.
The server covers a remarkably wide range of common utilities: unit conversions, calculators, text transformations, development helpers (JSON, regex, JWT, subnet), and generators. Minor gaps exist (e.g., currency converter, time zone converter), but for a general-purpose toolkit, it is largely comprehensive.