tool_number

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It provides zero information about side effects, return values, or processing behavior, making the tool's operation completely opaque.

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 very short, but it is under-specified rather than concise. The parameter listing duplicates what is already in the schema, and the '[basic] Number' prefix adds no value. Every part should serve a purpose, but here none of the content is informative.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description must fully explain the tool's behavior and return value. It does neither, leaving the tool incomplete for any meaningful agent use. The single parameter is self-referential and provides no contextual insight.

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%, and the description simply repeats the schema's 'value' parameter without adding new meaning. Since the schema already documents the parameter adequately, the baseline of 3 applies despite the lack of additional semantic detail.

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 '[basic] Number' restates the tool name without any verb or action. It does not state what the tool does, making it a tautology. It also fails to distinguish this tool from siblings like tool_string or tool_boolean.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool. There is no mention of appropriate use cases, prerequisites, or alternatives, leaving the agent without any decision support.

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