frankfurter_convert

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds the useful context that rates come from the ECB, but does not mention rate freshness, caching, or whether the rate is a snapshot or live value.

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?

A single well-formed sentence with zero filler, front-loading the action and scope. Nothing extraneous and nothing important buried.

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 read-only conversion tool with full schema coverage, annotations covering safety, and no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient. A brief note on rate recency or currency code format would close the remaining gap.

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 amount, from, and to are already documented in the schema. The description adds no format details (e.g., currency code casing, whether amount supports decimals) beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Convert') and resource ('amount between two currencies') and adds the data source ('using ECB rates'). However, it does not distinguish itself from the many sibling conversion tools such as forex_convert or exchangerate_convert, so an agent must infer the difference from the name alone.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus forex_convert, exchangerate_convert, or the frankfurter_latest/currencies siblings. The ECB reference hints at scope but no conditions or exclusions are stated, leaving selection to inference.

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