eda_sys_unit_mil_to_inch

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the return value ('returns: 输出英寸数') and the conversion behavior, which is helpful. However, it does not explain what numberOfDecimals does, rounding behavior, or confirm that this is a pure calculation with no side effects.

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 extremely compact: a signature, a one-line purpose, and a one-line return note. It is front-loaded and contains no filler or redundant prose.

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 pure conversion tool, the description is nearly sufficient and covers the core purpose and return. However, it omits an explanation of the optional decimal parameter and does not position the tool relative to its sibling converters, leaving a small but real 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?

The schema only exposes an opaque 'args' array, so the description's signature adds parameter names, types, and order. That is useful, but it does not explain the meaning of numberOfDecimals beyond its name, and the schema coverage baseline is already high.

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 explicitly states the conversion direction ('单位转换：密尔到英寸' / mil to inch) and provides the exact function signature. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling converters like eda_sys_unit_inch_to_mil and eda_sys_unit_mil_to_mm.

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 versus the other unit-conversion siblings, and no context or exclusions are provided. It is a bare description of what the function does, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage.

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