convert_temperature

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

With no annotations, the description must describe behavior fully. It claims support for 'direct input' but the required schema fields (file_name, file_type, file_content) contradict this. The return format and error handling are not mentioned, and the tool's behavior with missing optional parameters is unclear.

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 concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, given the complexity of the tool, it could be more structured, but the brevity does not harm clarity significantly.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and the ambiguity between file vs. direct input modes, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how file content is used (e.g., format expectations), how to use value/from_unit for direct input, or what the response contains. The agent is left with unresolved questions.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, so baseline is 3. However, the description adds confusion by mentioning 'direct input' while optional parameters value and from_unit are not required. The description fails to clarify how the file-related parameters interact with direct input, reducing the value added 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 tool converts temperature units between Celsius and Fahrenheit. It distinguishes from sibling tools (calculate, generate-plan, execute-step) which are unrelated. However, it could be more specific about whether it handles single values or bulk conversions.

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. The description mentions two modes (file content or direct input) but fails to clarify when each is appropriate. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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