convert_currency

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

With no annotations, the description must bear the full burden. It discloses that rates are daily and live, and that the return includes the converted amount and rate. However, it omits details about error handling, precision, or any caveats about the rate source.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and includes return behavior without any wasted words.

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 conversion tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, inputs, and return value. It lacks edge-case details but is sufficient given the tool's simplicity and low risk.

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% for all three parameters; the description adds ISO 4217 code examples but these are already implied by the schema's own text. It does not materially extend schema semantics, so a 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 clearly states 'Convert an amount between currencies' with a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools like convert_timezone and convert_units by explicitly referencing currencies and ISO 4217 codes.

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 gives clear context (currency conversion with live daily rates) but does not explicitly mention alternatives like convert_batch or provide exclusions. Usage is implied but no when-not-to-use guidance.

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