Buck / Boost / Buck-Boost Converter Calculator

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

The description aligns with annotations (readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint) by presenting the tool as a calculation function with no side effects. It adds behavioral context: returns structured output, operates in CCM, and requires specific inputs. No contradictions.

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 concise, with a clear purpose statement, a parameter list, output format, and an example. Every sentence adds value. Slightly more structured formatting could improve readability, but it is effective.

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 the tool's complexity (7 parameters, multiple topologies) and the presence of output schema, the description covers purpose, all parameters, outputs, and an example. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to use 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by listing arguments compactly with defaults, explaining ripple_current_pct as a percentage of Iout, and providing a concrete example that clarifies units and expected values. This enriches the schema information.

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 it calculates duty cycle, minimum inductance, capacitance, input current, and peak switch current for buck, boost, or inverting buck-boost converters. It specifies the operating mode (CCM) and distinguishes it from other embedcalc tools that handle different domains like resistors or wire.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusion criteria (e.g., for DCM). However, it gives a concrete example and references a sibling tool (embedcalc_eseries_nearest) for rounding, implying a workflow. This is adequate but not explicit.

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