sin

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

No annotations exist, so description must disclose behaviors. It only states 'Compute sine' without mentioning input domain, output range, accuracy, or error handling. The schema indicates x is in radians but nothing else.

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?

Extremely concise (two words), but lacks structure beyond a phrase. For a simple tool, it is acceptable, but a slightly more descriptive sentence would improve clarity.

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?

Given no annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits behavioral details like handling of special values, performance, or output precision. A more complete description would include such info.

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%, so schema already describes parameters. Description adds no additional meaning beyond what's in the schema (e.g., doesn't explain precision's effect). 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?

Description clearly states it computes sine. The verb 'compute' and resource 'sine' are specific. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like cos or tan, but the name alone is sufficient.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like asin or other trigonometric functions. The usage is implied by the name, but no context is provided.

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