LM317 Resistor Calculator

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

Annotations indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description complements this by detailing the formula, default values, return structure, and an example. 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?

Extremely concise: 4 sentences plus an example, with no fluff. The most critical information (purpose, formula, modes, defaults, return, example) is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 output schema exists (though not shown in input), the description adequately covers inputs, modes, and return format. Minor lack of edge case handling (e.g., providing both inputs) but acceptable for a simple calculator.

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%, but the description adds value by clarifying the mutual exclusivity of target_vout and r2_ohm, summarizing defaults, and specifying the return object structure. This goes beyond the schema's property descriptions.

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?

Clearly states it computes R2 from target Vout or Vout from R1/R2 for the LM317 regulator. Provides the formula and explicit verb+resource, distinguishing itself from numerous sibling embedcalc_ 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?

Explains the two modes of operation and the constraint to provide exactly one of target_vout or r2_ohm. Mentions a follow-up tool (embedcalc_eseries_nearest) for rounding, guiding the agent on next steps. Lacks explicit when-not-to-use, but context is sufficient.

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