ldm_calculator

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

Annotations already indicate readOnly=true, destructive=false, idempotent=true. The description adds behavioral context: it performs calculation using given formula, supports pallet presets and custom dimensions, multiple vehicle types, and stacking. No contradictions.

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 concise at ~5 sentences, well-structured with a purpose statement, formula, bulleted use cases, and a final sentence on supported options. Every sentence adds value, no fluff.

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 9 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the calculation logic, pallet/vehicle options, and use cases well. However, it does not describe the exact output format (e.g., returns a single LDM value, or includes utilisation, weight check results). Slight gap in return value expectations.

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% (all parameters described in schema). The description adds aggregate context, explains preset dimensions, default values for parameters like quantity and stackable, and the relationship between presets and custom parameters. This goes beyond baseline 3, but some parameter details (e.g., weight_kg usage, vehicle_length_m requirement) are only in 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 clearly states 'Calculate loading metres (LDM) for road freight shipments' with a specific verb and resource. It explains the concept of LDM and provides the formula, distinguishing it from sibling tools like cbm_calculator or pallet_fitting_calculator.

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 explicitly lists three use cases: quoting European road freight, calculating trailer utilisation, and checking pallet fit. This gives clear guidance on when to use the tool, effectively differentiating it from siblings.

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