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

The tool is a straightforward unit conversion with no side effects. With no annotations, the description effectively conveys its behavior. Adding possible precision or error handling details would be beneficial but is not critical.

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 a single, concise sentence that contains no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the key action and result.

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 simple one-parameter conversion tool with an output schema, the description is fully adequate. It tells the agent exactly what the tool does and what input it expects.

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 coverage is 100%, and the parameter description in the schema already explains the input. The tool description adds no additional semantic value beyond the schema.

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 action ('Convert') and the resources involved ('knots to kilometers per hour'). It is specific and distinct from sibling tools like mph_to_kph or kilometers_to_miles.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as mph_to_kph or the many other conversion tools. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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