subtract

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. The operand order ('second from first') is the key behavioral disclosure for a non-commutative operation and is stated explicitly. However, it says nothing about output type, precision, or edge cases like overflow, so the coverage is partial.

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 short sentences, zero waste, with the core operation front-loaded and the sibling routing second. Well-structured for a minimal tool.

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 two-param arithmetic tool with no output schema, the description covers the operation, operand order, and sibling alternative. Missing only trivial details like return format, which is predictable for arithmetic.

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%, so the schema already defines minuend and subtrahend. The description reinforces the operand order in prose, which is the only semantic nuance for this tool, adding marginal value on top of a complete schema.

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 states a specific verb and the exact operand relationship: 'Subtracts the second number from the first.' This distinguishes it from siblings like add and multiply 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?

It names the alternative (batch_calc) and the condition (several operations or chained steps in one call), which gives clear routing guidance. It doesn't state when subtraction itself is the wrong choice, but that's inherent to the operation.

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