convert_from_base_units

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

Annotations include openWorldHint=true, and the description does not add significant behavioral context beyond that. It does not mention return format, rounding behavior, or how token decimals are resolved, though the schema partially covers this. No contradictions, but limited added value.

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 front-loads the core action. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy or filler.

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 conversion tool with full schema coverage and an openWorldHint annotation, the description is largely complete. It clearly defines the input-output relationship, though it does not explicitly state the return type; however, this is implied by 'human-readable units'. The absence of an output schema is mitigated by the tool's simplicity.

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 100%, so the parameters are fully documented. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, only clarifying the output is 'human-readable units'. This meets the baseline but does not go beyond it.

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 converts a token amount from its smallest unit (e.g., wei) to human-readable units, which is a specific verb+resource and distinguishes it from convert_to_base_units siblings. The direction is unambiguous and matches the tool's name.

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 a base-unit amount and want a human-readable equivalent) but does not explicitly state when to use it versus convert_to_base_units, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites. The context is clear but not fully articulated.

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