estimate_value

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

No annotations are provided, so the description should disclose behavioral traits. It only states a formula and does not explain side effects, idempotency, auth requirements, or return behavior. The agent lacks information on whether this is a read operation or what the output looks like.

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 line with no redundancy. However, it lacks structural elements like sections or bullet points. For a simple tool with a clear formula, this is efficient but could be improved.

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?

The tool has no output schema, and the description does not specify the return format (e.g., a number, currency, range). With three parameters and a formula, the agent needs to know what value to expect. The description is too sparse to be 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% for all three parameters. The description adds a formula that explains how parameters relate, but no additional per-parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states '价值预估' (value estimation) and provides the formula '基础价+品系基因溢价×品级系数', clearly indicating the tool computes an estimated value based on species, genes, and grade. This is distinct from sibling tools like genetic_calculator or search_by_traits.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or typical scenarios. The formula is given but without context for selection.

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