multiply

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the 'finite numbers' constraint, which is useful domain context, but it does not add much beyond 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 front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the verb, operand constraints, and formula immediately.

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 an extremely simple pure arithmetic tool with an output schema and comprehensive annotations, the description is complete. An agent knows exactly what inputs are valid and what operation will be performed.

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 0%, so the description must carry meaning for the parameters. The phrase 'a * b' and 'two finite numbers' clarifies that both parameters are numeric operands and their relationship, but it does not describe each parameter individually. This is adequate for such a simple operation.

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'), identifies the resource ('two finite numbers'), and states the exact operation ('a * b'). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools add, subtract, and divide.

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 makes the use case explicit: call this tool when you need to multiply exactly two finite numbers. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling set is small and the operation is unambiguous.

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