decimal_to_base

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the conversion action but lacks behavioral details: it doesn't specify output format (e.g., string representation), error handling for invalid inputs, or performance characteristics. The base range (2-36) is noted, but other critical behaviors like input validation or edge cases are omitted.

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 highly concise and front-loaded: a single sentence directly states the tool's function, followed by domain/category metadata. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool's moderate complexity (conversion with range constraints), no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on output format, error conditions, and parameter semantics, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent to invoke it correctly without additional context or trial-and-error.

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%, meaning parameters 'number' and 'base' are undocumented in the schema. The description adds minimal semantics: it implies 'number' is a decimal integer and 'base' is an integer between 2 and 36, but doesn't clarify parameter roles, units, or constraints beyond the base range. This is inadequate for two required parameters with no schema documentation.

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: 'Convert a decimal number to its representation in another base (2-36).' It specifies the verb ('convert'), resource ('decimal number'), and target ('another base'), with explicit base range constraints. However, it doesn't distinguish from sibling tools like 'base_to_decimal' or 'number_to_base', which handle related but inverse operations.

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 mentions a domain ('arithmetic') and category ('general'), but offers no explicit when/when-not instructions or references to sibling tools like 'base_to_decimal' for reverse conversions. Usage is implied by the function name alone.

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