birth_year_from_age

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

Annotations already establish read-only and closed-world behavior. The description adds that the result is a range with 'exact and loose' variants, but it does not define those variants, state assumptions, or explain calendar handling, so the added behavioral context is limited.

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 a single compact, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Although 'exact and loose' is cryptic, the overall structure is appropriate and every phrase contributes.

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?

For a simple two-parameter calculation tool, annotations cover safety and an output schema exists for return values, so the description need not explain output. It still omits routing guidance versus sibling date tools and leaves 'exact and loose' input assumptions implicit, but it is effectively complete for basic invocation.

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 50%: record_date has a schema description, while age does not. The description clarifies that age comes from a historical record and lists example record types, but it does not specify age units, expected format, or how record_date affects the calculation.

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 names the resource and computation clearly: a birth-year range implied by an age in a record, with concrete record contexts. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools such as normalize_date or convert_calendar, so it is clear but lacks named sibling differentiation.

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?

It implies use when interpreting an age from a census, confession list, or death record, giving useful context. However, it provides no explicit when-not conditions and does not name alternative tools, so usage must be inferred.

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