waist_hip_ratio

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

The only behavioral trait disclosed is the cost ($0.001 USDC via x402), which is useful but insufficient. There is no mention of side effects, permissions, input format, or return behavior. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden and fails to convey what happens when the tool is invoked.

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 very brief, but the content is mostly a repetition of the tool name and a cost statement. It is not overly verbose, yet the limited content borders on under-specification rather than conciseness. The cost information earns its place, but the rest adds little value.

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 has no output schema, no annotations, and a trivial generic schema, leaving the description as the sole source of guidance. The description fails to explain what the tool does, what inputs it requires, or what the output will be. It is completely inadequate for a tool that needs structured parameters to function.

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 only contains a generic 'params' object with no specific fields, and the description adds no parameter details. The agent has no way to know what inputs (e.g., waist measurement, hip measurement) are expected. Schema coverage is technically 100% but only because the sole property is a placeholder, so the description must compensate and does not.

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 essentially restates the tool name 'waist hip ratio' without adding a verb or clarifying what it does. The phrase 'Other Utilities tool' is a category label, not a functional explanation. This is a tautology that fails to specify that it calculates or computes a waist-to-hip ratio.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like calculate_bmi or body_fat_calc. There is no mention of context, exclusions, or preferred scenarios. The description only notes the cost, which is irrelevant to usage selection.

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