Calculator

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only lists operations and says 'basic arithmetic', which repeats the schema's enum. It does not disclose edge-case behaviors like division by zero, square root of negative numbers, or return format, which are important for a calculator tool.

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 filler. It concisely conveys the tool's scope and supported operations.

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?

The tool has potential failure modes (e.g., divide by zero, sqrt of negative) and no output schema, leaving the agent unaware of return values or error handling. The schema captures parameter types but the description adds no behavioral context beyond a listing of operations, making it incomplete for safe invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, providing descriptions for all parameters. However, the description says 'on two numbers' which is misleading for sqrt, which uses only one operand. This internal inconsistency detracts from the schema's clarity.

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 performs basic arithmetic operations, listing specific supported operations (add, subtract, multiply, divide, power, sqrt). This distinguishes it from sibling tools, which are unrelated (e.g., echo, read_file, create_project).

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 implies this is for basic arithmetic, which is clear context. Since no sibling tool performs similar arithmetic, explicit exclusions are unnecessary. However, it lacks guidance on when to prefer this over, say, a more specialized calculator tool (none exist here).

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