calculate

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Perform basic arithmetic calculations' without explaining error handling (e.g., division by zero), return format, or side-effect-free nature. This is insufficient for a clear behavioral profile.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 low complexity and complete schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, with no output schema or annotations, it would benefit from stating the return value or edge cases like division by zero. The description is not entirely complete but is not severely lacking for a basic arithmetic tool.

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 schema has 100% description coverage, with each parameter (a, b, operation) already documented. The description adds no extra semantic meaning, so baseline 3 is appropriate. It does not clarify nuances like numeric types or result precision.

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 uses a specific verb ('perform') and identifies the resource ('basic arithmetic calculations'), making it clear what the tool does. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like convert_temperature and get_commitments, which are for different domains.

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 does not mention contexts, exclusions, or comparisons to sibling tools like convert_temperature or extract_commitments.

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