convert_odds

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the conversion action and formats; it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, what the output format is, or how errors are handled (e.g., invalid odds). The absence of any annotation context means this is a significant 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?

The description is a single, focused sentence that conveys the core purpose without redundant words. It is front-loaded with the verb and directly lists the conversion targets.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description does not explain what the result of the conversion looks like or provide any guidance on edge cases or expected return values. Given the tool's simplicity, a brief mention of the output would improve completeness.

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 schema already enumerates the target formats in the 'format' enum, and the description repeats them in prose without adding meaning (e.g., that 'implied probability' corresponds to the 'probability' enum value, or that 'odds' can be fractional strings like '3/2'). The odds parameter has a schema description, and the description adds no further semantic detail for either parameter.

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 the action verb 'Convert' and explicitly names the resource ('a price') and the supported formats (decimal, fractional, American, implied probability). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like 'settle_single' or 'parlay_odds' which handle betting operations rather than format conversion.

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 the tool is for converting odds between formats but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives, nor does it note exclusions. The phrase 'Convert a price between...' provides context but lacks explicit guidance such as 'use for odds conversion only' or 'not for settlement calculations.'

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