multiply

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It accurately states the core computation, multiplication, which is sufficient for a simple pure function with no side effects or permissions involved. The return value is not described, but an output schema exists to cover that.

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, efficient sentence with no filler or repetition. Every word earns its place: 'Multiply two numbers' fully communicates the tool's purpose in a front-loaded manner.

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's low complexity, a two-parameter schema with both params required, and an existing output schema, the description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke the tool. There are no side effects, prerequisites, or edge-case behaviors that need additional disclosure for a basic arithmetic operation.

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?

Input schema description coverage is 0%, and the schema only exposes parameter names and types. The description adds minimal semantic value by clarifying that both a and b are the numbers to be multiplied, but it does not provide individual parameter descriptions. Since multiplication is commutative, parameter roles are symmetric, reducing the need for more 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 uses a specific verb, 'Multiply,' and a clear resource, 'two numbers,' which precisely identifies the operation. Even among many sibling arithmetic tools, the term 'multiply' unambiguously distinguishes it from add, divide, power, and other operations.

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 operation itself implies when to use the tool: whenever a product of two numbers is needed. However, there is no explicit mention of when not to use it or how it compares to sibling tools such as add or power, so the usage guidance is only implied.

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