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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It reveals that the tool returns effective_dpi, but it does not disclose whether the tool has side effects, requires specific permissions, or if it is read-only. The mention of 'maximum print size' in the purpose is not reflected in the return value, creating ambiguity.

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: the first efficiently states the purpose, and the second provides a useful reference to list_bundles. No wasted words, front-loaded with key information.

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?

Given the tool has 4 required parameters and an output schema likely detailing complex return values, the description is incomplete. It mentions returning {effective_dpi} but also claims to calculate 'maximum print size,' which is not reflected in the described output. This inconsistency leaves ambiguity about the full return structure.

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 already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all four parameters. The description adds no additional meaning or context beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 calculates print DPI quality and maximum print size from image pixel dimensions. It uses specific verbs and resources. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools except by referencing list_bundles for related photography calculators, which is indirect.

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 implies usage when you have pixel dimensions and print size, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. The mention of list_bundles for related calculators provides some context but no direct guidance on exclusion or prerequisites.

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