convert_temperature

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the core function, omitting details like rounding behavior, tolerance, or handling of invalid units. The tool likely performs standard conversions, but the description offers no assurance.

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 concise sentence that gets to the point. However, it is too brief given the lack of parameter explanations, sacrificing completeness for brevity.

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 three required parameters with no schema descriptions and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not specify how units should be represented (e.g., 'C' vs 'celsius') or confirm bidirectional conversion. An agent would need additional documentation to use it reliably.

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%, but the description adds no parameter information. It does not explain that 'value' is the numeric input, 'from' and 'to' specify source/target units. The agent must guess from parameter names and types.

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 converts temperature units and lists the specific units (C, F, K). This distinguishes it from sibling converters like convert_length or convert_volume. However, it could be more explicit about the conversion direction (e.g., any unit to any other).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisite knowledge (e.g., valid unit codes) or situations where other tools might be more appropriate. The agent is left to infer from the name.

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