Bsa Mosteller

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It correctly states that this is a calculation tool producing BSA and BMI, which conveys the pure-computation nature. It does not detail the formula, rounding, or return format, but the presence of an output schema compensates for some of this gap.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and outputs, containing no filler or redundancy. Every word contributes to the tool's purpose.

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 simple two-parameter calculator with a detailed input schema and an output schema, this description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly. No critical behavioral or parameter information is missing.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both required parameters, clearly defining height_cm and weight_kg with positivity constraints. The description adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Calculate') and names the exact outputs: body surface area by Mosteller and body mass index. This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like parkland_formula and drip_rate_calculator, which address different clinical calculations.

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 clearly implies when to use the tool: whenever BSA or BMI values are needed from weight and height. While it does not explicitly state exclusions or name alternatives, the sibling tools are sufficiently different that an agent can infer the correct choice from context.

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