fuel_reserve_calculator

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses return format (formatted string with components) and error handling (errors returned as formatted strings). For a read-only calculator, this is transparent, though no explicit statement about side effects.

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 well-structured docstring with purpose, args, returns, and raises. It is concise with no unnecessary information, and the purpose is front-loaded.

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?

The description covers inputs, outputs, and error handling. With 6 parameters and an output schema (not visible but indicated), it is largely complete. However, specifics on how each regulation affects calculations could enhance 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?

Schema has 0% description coverage, but the description includes an Args section with brief explanations for all parameters (e.g., 'trip_fuel_kg: Planned trip fuel in kg'). This adds meaning beyond the schema titles.

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 required fuel reserves per aviation regulations.' This provides a specific verb and resource, and the tool is distinct from siblings which are other aerospace 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 gives a clear context (aviation regulations) but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Usage is implied but no exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned.

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