square_root

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the return is a string, and that an error message is returned for negative input. This is transparent about the error handling and output format. Lacks detail on precision or rounding, but for a simple operation this is sufficient.

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?

Concise, well-structured with Args and Returns sections. No unnecessary words. Front-loaded purpose.

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?

For a single-parameter math function, the description covers purpose, parameter constraint, and return behavior including errors. The output schema exists (per context), so the description need not explain return values in detail, but it does anyway. It could mention formatting but not critical.

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 has zero description coverage, so the description compensates by explaining the parameter 'value' and its constraint (non-negative). This adds critical semantic meaning beyond the schema type.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Compute the square root of a number.' Distinguishes from sibling arithmetic operations like add, subtract, etc. Clear and unambiguous.

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?

Does not explicitly contrast with siblings, but the operation is self-explanatory as a distinct math function. Provides no explicit when-to-use guidance, but implies usage for square root calculations. Slight gap: no mention of alternatives for other operations, but that's obvious given the tool name and description.

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