estimate_conversion

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It clearly states no payment or conversion occurs, and lists return values (pages, credits, price, etc.), making behavior transparent without contradiction.

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 concise, front-loaded with purpose, and uses bullet points for arguments and returns. Every sentence serves a purpose with 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 only one parameter, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is quite complete. It explains return fields and file types. However, terms like 'credits' and 'payTo' could use more explanation for full context.

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 description adds file type hints (pdf/docx/xlsx/pptx) to the sole parameter 'file_path', which the schema lacks (0% coverage). This compensates for the schema gap, though additional format details could enhance clarity.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: checking document conversion price without performing the conversion. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'convert_document' by specifying no payment or conversion happens.

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 implies when to use (before converting) and that it's a dry run. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use, the contrast with the sibling tool provides context. Could be more explicit about use cases.

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