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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It only states it computes and returns slope values, with no mention of side effects, permissions, or other behavioral traits. This is insufficient for a tool with no annotations.

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 brief with two sentences and a reference, but it includes irrelevant information about inputs that do not match the schema. It is mostly concise but has minor waste due to inaccuracy.

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?

There is an output schema, so return values need not be explained. However, the inconsistency between described inputs and actual schema creates a gap. For a simple calculation tool, the description is adequate but not complete due to the mismatch.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). However, the description adds extraneous inputs (pipe length, application) that are not in the schema, potentially confusing. Schema does the heavy lifting, and description adds little value.

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 states the tool computes drain slope for plumbing/roof drainage, but it mentions inputs (pipe length, application) that are not in the actual schema, causing inconsistency. Purpose is somewhat clear but marred by mismatched information.

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 advises to use for plumbing or roof drainage and references list_bundles for related tools, but it does not explicitly state when not to use or name specific alternatives. Guidance is implied but lacks depth.

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