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

With no annotations, the description discloses the calculation method (60/80/100 W/m²), scope (infrared/electric), and that running cost per full-load hour is included, offering meaningful behavioral context beyond a simple statement.

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 sentences (one bilingual) convey the core purpose and key calculation parameters without redundancy or unnecessary padding.

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 tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description effectively communicates inputs, calculation basis, and that both power and cost are output, though it does not specify the exact return format or note any limitations.

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 descriptions already cover all parameters (100%), but the description clarifies the purpose of the electricity price parameter by linking it to running cost per full-load hour, and the insulation mapping is already in the schema; the added context about output slightly exceeds the baseline.

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 explicitly states the tool calculates required heating power in watts for a room based on floor area and insulation standard, distinguishing it from siblings like BTU recommendation or AC cost tools.

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?

It implies usage for heating power estimation but does not provide explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternative tools such as btu_empfehlung, nor does it state any exclusions.

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