Calculate Water Additions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It mentions support for named profiles or custom ion values, but does not describe the output format, return values, or any constraints like the required volume parameter. This leaves significant ambiguity about tool 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?

Two concise sentences: first states purpose, second adds key capability. No wasted words, front-loaded.

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?

Despite 15 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It does not explain how to combine named profiles with custom values, does not mention that volume_litres is required, and provides no examples. The tool is complex but the description is not sufficiently complete.

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 100%, baseline 3. The description adds value by clarifying that parameters can be supplied via named profiles or custom ion values, which is not obvious from the schema alone. This helps the agent understand how to use the many parameters.

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?

Description clearly states 'Calculate mineral salt additions needed to adjust brewing water from a source profile to a target profile.' This is a specific verb and resource, but it does not explicitly distinguish from the sibling tool 'match_water_profile'. However, the focus on calculating additions is clear.

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 usage when adjusting water profiles ('needed to adjust'), but it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives like 'match_water_profile'.

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