base_to_decimal

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the conversion action but lacks behavioral details: no mention of error handling (e.g., invalid base or number), performance characteristics, or output format. The description is functional but insufficient for a mutation-free tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 extremely concise—a single sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core purpose and includes helpful domain/category tags. Every element earns its place, making it efficient for quick understanding.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain the return value (decimal representation), error conditions, or how it differs from sibling tools like 'base_conversion'. For a 2-parameter tool with no structured support, more contextual detail is needed.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'base' (2-36) but doesn't explain the 'number' parameter's format (e.g., string representation in the given base). The description adds minimal value beyond the bare schema, leaving key parameter semantics undocumented.

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's purpose: converting a number from a specified base to decimal. It specifies the base range (2-36) and includes domain/category context. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'base_conversion' or 'binary_to_decimal', which perform similar base 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?

The description provides minimal usage guidance. It mentions the base range (2-36) but offers no explicit when-to-use instructions, alternatives, or exclusions compared to sibling tools. The domain/category tags ('arithmetic', 'general') are too broad to serve as meaningful usage guidelines.

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