Timestamp Convert

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by noting that Delx Agent Utilities are separate from the free witness protocol and may expose x402 utility pricing, which is relevant behavioral context beyond the schema and annotations.

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?

Two sentences: first states functionality clearly, second adds relevant context about pricing. Every sentence is purposeful, front-loaded, and concise with no waste.

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, the description covers purpose and pricing context. However, it lacks details about the return format (e.g., whether output is a string or object), which would be helpful given no output schema. Overall adequate.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema clearly documents both parameters. The description adds marginal value by clarifying that 'human' corresponds to human-readable format, but this is already implied by the enum value. 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 between timestamp formats: Unix epoch, ISO 8601, and human-readable.' It specifies the verb (convert), resource (timestamps), and distinct formats, differentiating it from sibling utility tools.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives (e.g., other util_ tools). It lacks context on preferred formats or use cases, leaving the agent without decision support.

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