speed_converter

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action (convert) but does not disclose what the output looks like, whether it is reversible, how invalid units are handled, or any side effects. For a read-only conversion tool, the lack of output format description is a notable omission.

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 one short sentence that front-loads the purpose and then lists inputs. It is extremely concise with no filler words, earning a 5 for conciseness.

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?

The tool is simple (3 params, no output schema) but the description is incomplete. It does not specify the exact unit strings expected, the output format, or any error behavior. Without enums or schema descriptions, the agent must infer too much to call this tool 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain the parameters. It only lists 'value, from, to' without explaining that value is a number, from is the source unit, and to is the target unit. The unit list implies the format, but the exact accepted strings (e.g., 'mph' vs 'mi/h') are not specified, leaving ambiguity.

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 the tool converts speed and lists the supported units (m/s, km/h, mph, knots, ft/s), which distinguishes it from sibling converters like length_converter or weight_converter. The verb 'Convert' and resource 'speed' are specific, but it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings, so a 4 is appropriate rather than a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the other converters, nor any exclusions or alternatives mentioned. The implication that it's for speed conversions is present through the unit list, but no explicit 'use for speed only' or reference to sibling tools is given. For a converter family, this is a gap.

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