number_to_words

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'any number' but does not clarify handling of negative numbers, decimals, or the exact output format (e.g., lowercase, hyphens, 'and' usage). The schema mentions the limit 'up to 999 trillion', but the description omits this, leaving gaps in transparency.

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?

A single sentence with an example, no redundant information. Every word earns its place, achieving maximum conciseness.

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 simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is adequate but lacks details about return format and edge cases (e.g., negative numbers). It is not fully complete for an agent to anticipate all behaviors.

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 coverage is 100% (the parameter 'number' is described with its limit). The description adds an example but does not significantly enhance meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies as schema does the heavy lifting.

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 action 'Convert' and the resource 'number to its written English word form', with an example that makes the output explicit. It is specific and distinct from sibling tools, which include other converters but not number-to-words.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'roman_numeral_converter'. There are no usage exclusions or alternative recommendations, which would be needed for a higher score.

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