log2

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the return value ('Returns log₂(x)') but does not cover error handling (e.g., for non-positive inputs), performance characteristics, or other behavioral traits. The domain/category hint is minimal and not actionable.

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, with every word contributing essential information: the action, the mathematical function, and the return value. There is no wasted text, making it efficient for quick comprehension.

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 simplicity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimal but adequate for basic understanding. However, it lacks details on error conditions, input constraints, and output format, which are important for a mathematical function tool, making it incomplete for robust use.

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%, but the description adds meaning by naming the parameter 'x' and specifying it as 'a number' for which the base-2 logarithm is calculated. However, it does not elaborate on constraints (e.g., x > 0) or provide examples, leaving gaps in parameter understanding.

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 with a specific verb ('Calculate') and resource ('base-2 logarithm of a number'), and distinguishes it from siblings by specifying 'log₂(x)' and the domain/category. It directly answers what the tool does without ambiguity.

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 like 'log' or 'ln', nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. It only states the function's mathematical operation without contextual usage advice.

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