calculate

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only says 'calculate the result,' missing critical details like error handling, allowed complexity, security implications, or return format. The presence of an output schema (not shown) mitigates this slightly, but the description alone is insufficient.

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 sentence, making it concise, but it may be too minimal. Front-loading is fine, but the lack of structure (e.g., no separation of purpose, usage, behavior) hurts readability for the agent.

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?

Given the tool has one parameter, no annotations, and an output schema (unseen), the description should provide more context about return values, error cases, or supported math. It is incomplete for a tool that likely evaluates arbitrary expressions, which has safety and formatting implications.

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 compensate. It fails to explain the format of the 'expression' string (e.g., operators, functions, precedence). The agent has no guidance on how to construct valid expressions beyond the type 'string'.

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 calculates a mathematical expression, which differentiates it from sibling tools like convert_currency or get_weather. However, it does not specify the scope of supported operations (e.g., basic arithmetic vs. advanced functions), leaving some ambiguity.

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 explicit guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the sibling tools are domain-specific (currency, weather), so the intended use case is reasonably implied. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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