khoi_luong_tuong

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful domain context (what is measured and in which units: m, m2, m3, mm), but says nothing about the optional 'revit' parameter, prerequisites, or rate/scope limits.

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 front-loaded sentence naming the resource first, then the grouping and units. No filler, though it is terse enough that it omits helpful context.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, and the description covers the measured quantities. However, the undocumented 'revit' parameter and the absence of any routing guidance relative to sibling quantity tools leave gaps.

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?

There is one parameter, 'revit', with 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it. No meaning, format, or default behavior is added for it, so an agent gets no guidance on what to pass.

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?

States the specific resource (khối lượng tường – wall quantity) and the grouping dimensions (theo loại và tầng – by type and floor), plus the measurable outputs (length, area, volume, thickness). The word 'tường' distinguishes it from the sibling quantity tools khoi_luong_san and khoi_luong_ket_cau, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus the sibling quantity extractors (khoi_luong_san, khoi_luong_ket_cau) or the exporter xuat_excel_khoi_luong. The scope is inferable from the resource name, but no explicit context or exclusions are given.

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