calculate

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'performs simple math calculations' without any details about behavior such as error handling, supported operators, or side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to understand the tool's operational traits.

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 sentence that is concise and directly states the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no extraneous information. However, it could benefit from additional structure or details.

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 output schema and no annotations, the description fails to explain return values, supported operators, or error conditions. For a simple calculator tool, the description is too sparse to fully inform an agent.

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%: the 'expression' parameter has a description with examples. The tool description adds no new information beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description does not detract but adds minimal value.

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 states 'performs simple math calculations', clearly indicating the tool's purpose. It distinguishes from sibling tools 'get_time' and 'greet' which serve different functions. However, it does not specify the exact scope of supported math (e.g., arithmetic only or trigonometric functions).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While sibling tools are unrelated, the description does not provide explicit usage context or prerequisites. The agent must infer usage from the name and schema.

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