estimate_print_time

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds useful context that the estimate depends on material usage read from get_scene and reports seconds, but it does not disclose edge cases, failure behavior, or required scene state beyond the schema.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences. The first states the operation and output unit; the second gives a useful dependency pointer. No wasted words.

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 one optional parameter, read-only annotations, and no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it states units, the scene scope, and the dependency on get_scene. It could more explicitly state prerequisites or error conditions, but nothing essential is missing for a simple estimation call.

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 only parameter, scene_id, is already fully described in the input schema. The description adds no new parameter detail beyond referring to 'the scene,' which matches the schema baseline.

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?

Clearly states a specific action ('Estimate print time') on a specific resource ('the scene') with explicit output units ('in seconds'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like detect_cups or print_to_printer.

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?

Implies a dependency on get_scene by saying 'Read material usage from get_scene,' which suggests using get_scene first. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it.

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