datetime_from_timestamp

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

The description lacks behavioral details beyond the basic conversion. With no annotations, it should discuss edge cases, timestamp format (e.g., seconds vs milliseconds), and timezone handling, but it does not.

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 sentence with a front-loaded category tag, making it concise but lacking necessary details. It fits the minimal pattern but does not earn its place fully.

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's complexity (2 parameters, optional timezone, output schema exists), the description is incomplete. It mentions the output format but omits input validation, timezone semantics, and conversion assumptions, which are critical for correct usage.

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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description provides no information about the parameters 'timestamp' (expected format, numeric vs string) or 'timezone' (expected format like 'UTC' or 'America/New_York'). It adds no value beyond the schema field names.

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 verb 'Convert' and the resource 'Unix timestamp to an ISO 8601 datetime string,' distinguishing it from siblings like datetime_to_timestamp (reverse) and datetime_parse (string parsing).

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as datetime_to_timestamp or datetime_parse. The description assumes the user knows when a Unix timestamp to datetime conversion is needed, offering no explicit context or exclusions.

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