Convert an amount

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden and does disclose the non-obvious UYU routing and 'best available market rates'. However, it does not mention the return shape, whether the conversion is indicative or executable, or any error/edge-case behavior.

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 brief, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds useful information. There is no redundant or filler content.

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 three-parameter conversion tool, the core invocation details are covered by the schema and description. The main gap is the absence of an output schema or stated return format, but the tool's purpose and routing behavior are sufficiently clear for an agent to call it correctly.

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 input schema already describes all three parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by listing example accepted currency codes (USD, EUR, ARS, BRL, UYU), helping the agent construct valid from/to arguments.

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 states a clear action and resource: 'Convert an amount between currencies' using Uruguayan market rates. It also gives a distinguishing behavioral detail (foreign↔foreign routes through UYU), though it does not explicitly contrast any sibling tool.

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 when to use the tool (currency conversion with Uruguayan rates) but does not explicitly state when to prefer it over siblings like get_rates, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. Usage context is present but not fully articulated.

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