hexadecimal_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 of behavioral disclosure. It only states the conversion action without detailing error handling (e.g., invalid hex input), output format, or performance characteristics. This is a significant gap for a tool with no structured safety or behavioral hints.

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 and front-loaded, consisting of a single sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. There is no wasted verbiage, and it efficiently communicates the core functionality without unnecessary details.

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, output schema, and low schema description coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not address behavioral aspects like error handling or output format, and while the tool is simple, more context would help the agent use it correctly, especially with no sibling differentiation or parameter guidance.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, with one parameter 'hex_str' of type string. The description does not add any parameter-specific semantics beyond implying it expects a hexadecimal string. It does not clarify format (e.g., case sensitivity, prefix like '0x'), examples, or constraints, leaving the schema to define the parameter minimally.

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 hexadecimal to decimal numbers, specifying the domain (arithmetic) and category (number_systems). It uses a specific verb ('convert') and identifies the resource (hexadecimal number). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'binary_to_decimal' or 'octal_to_decimal', though the naming implies the distinction.

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 the domain and category but does not specify scenarios, prerequisites, or compare it to related sibling tools (e.g., 'binary_to_decimal', 'decimal_to_hexadecimal'), leaving the agent without explicit usage instructions.

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