Convert a drawing PDF between metric and imperial

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

The description confirms the input is never modified (consistent with destructiveHint=false) and notes that converted values are stamped over originals. It adds a safety warning about verifying critical dimensions, which provides context beyond what annotations convey about idempotency and non-destructiveness.

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 concise (~100 words), front-loaded with the core function, and every sentence contributes essential information (modes, prerequisites, limitations, safety warning). No redundant or filler content.

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?

Covers purpose, input/output, modes, prerequisites, and limitations. While no output schema exists, the description implies the output is a file at the specified path. Missing explicit return value details, but sufficient for a file-generation tool with high schema coverage.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the interplay between heuristic and classification modes, linking to specific parameters (classifications, bare_numbers). It also describes default output path behavior, integrating parameter usage into an actionable workflow.

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 action ('produce a converted copy'), resource ('technical-drawing PDF'), and outcome ('every recognised value stamped in place'). It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on PDF conversion with stamping, while other tools handle individual values or text extraction.

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?

Explicitly states when to use heuristic mode vs. classification mode, prerequisites (PDF with text layer), and alternatives for scanned drawings (web app) or preparatory step (extract_drawing_text). This provides clear guidance on when and how to use the tool.

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