network_subnet_calculator

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

No annotations provided. Description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond being a calculator. It lacks information on authentication, rate limits, side effects, or whether it is read-only. The 'free online' hint is weak.

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?

Two sentences, no fluff. However, it includes redundant info like 'Menu ID: subnet_calc' and repeats 'Subnet Calculator' in the first sentence. Could be slightly more efficient.

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?

Without an output schema, the description should explain return values. It lists calculations but is vague. The reference to describe_tool suggests additional instructions, reducing completeness. Sibling overlap not addressed.

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 100% for the single parameter worker_id. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, which already explains the parameter. Baseline score of 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states it is a subnet calculator with CIDR notation support, and lists what it calculates (IP ranges, network addresses, broadcast addresses, subnet analysis). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like network_cidr_calculator or network_ip_range_calculator, causing potential confusion.

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?

Description mentions using 'describe_tool with tool_id subnet_calc' for full guidance, implying a step for setup. It does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide usage context.

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