format_format_bytes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It shows the output format and mentions the binary parameter's effect, but it does not address edge cases (negative values, non-integer) or error behavior.

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 very concise, with one sentence plus an example. It front-loads the purpose and is efficient, but it could be more structured by listing parameters explicitly.

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 lack of schema descriptions and annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not cover the 'decimals' parameter, return type (though output schema exists), or behavior for invalid inputs.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must explain parameters. It partially explains the 'binary' parameter and implicitly shows 'decimals' through the example, but does not explicitly describe the 'decimals' parameter or its valid range.

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's purpose: formatting a byte count into a human-readable string (e.g., '1.2 MB'). It specifies the input (byte count) and output format, distinguishing it from other format tools like format_number or format_currency.

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 provides an example but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like format_number or format_duration. It lacks guidance on when not to use it or prerequisites.

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