divide

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the entire behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about division-by-zero handling, return format, or error behavior. For a trivial arithmetic tool that is forgivable, but the disclosure is still effectively absent.

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 short sentence with no padding, front-loading the operation and its operands. Nothing could be trimmed without losing content.

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 two-parameter pure arithmetic tool with a fully-covered schema and no output schema, the definition is nearly adequate. The remaining gap — no statement of what happens when b is zero — is minor but real for a divide operation.

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 schema already names both parameters; the baseline is 3. The description does add one useful nuance beyond the schema — that 'a' is the numerator and 'b' the denominator — but that is the only extra meaning conveyed.

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 pairs a clear verb with its operands ('Divide a by b'), which is enough to separate it from the arithmetic siblings add, subtract, and multiply. It does not, however, distinguish operand ordering semantics or distinguish itself from anything but the obvious siblings, so it does not reach the top mark.

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 alternatives; the description assumes the agent already knows it needs division. No prerequisites, no context, no exclusions are stated.

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