calculate_icp_fcp

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses the computational formulas and required inputs. As a read-only calculation tool, no destructive behaviors are expected, and the description sufficiently conveys the tool's behavior without contradictions.

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 at 76 words, combining formulas and parameter definitions. It is front-loaded with purpose and formula. However, structuring parameters as a list or table could improve readability.

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?

The tool has an output schema, but the description does not mention what the tool returns (presumably ICP and FCP values). While a simple calculation may be clear, explicit mention of output fields would improve completeness. The parameters are fully covered.

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 add meaning. It provides clear definitions for each parameter (e.g., 'Shut-in drill pipe pressure (psi)'), significantly enhancing understanding beyond the bare schema names. The formulas also clarify relationships.

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 calculates Initial Circulating Pressure (ICP) and Final Circulating Pressure (FCP) for well kill operations, with explicit formulas. This specific purpose distinguishes it from sibling tools like calculate_kill_mud_weight which computes a different value.

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 mentions 'for well kill operations' providing context, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance. Implicit usage is clear but no explicit comparisons.

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