convert_from_base_unit

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

The only annotation is openWorldHint: true, but the description does not clarify whether the conversion is a pure arithmetic operation or interacts with the blockchain. The chainId parameter hints at chain involvement, yet no explanation is given. No contradiction with annotations, but the tool's behavior is underspecified.

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 with no filler. It is front-loaded and easy to parse, making good use of the available space.

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?

While the tool is simple and parameters are well-documented, there is no output schema and no explanation of the return value or the purpose of chainId. The openWorldHint annotation is not addressed, leaving some behavioral ambiguity. Adequate for a simple conversion, but not fully complete.

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 provides complete descriptions for all three parameters (amount, decimals, chainId), so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema already states.

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 'Convert an amount of an ERC20 token from its base unit to its decimal unit' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating a unit conversion. However, it does not differentiate itself from similarly named siblings like convert_from_base_units or convert_to_base_unit, so it loses the top score.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus its near-duplicate siblings (convert_from_base_units, convert_to_base_unit). No context about use cases, exclusions, or prerequisites is provided.

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