calculate_nozzle_tfa

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

No annotations are provided; the description fully discloses the mathematical formula and parameter format. As a pure calculation with no side effects, the description is sufficiently transparent. It could mention it is deterministic and stateless, but not required.

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 three sentences: the purpose, the formula, and the parameter description. Every sentence adds value, and it is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 that an output schema exists, the description does not need to explain return values. It fully covers the input format and the calculation method. For a simple math tool, this is complete.

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 significant meaning beyond the input schema: it explains that nozzle sizes are in 32nds of an inch and provides an example. The schema coverage is 0% (no property descriptions), so the description fully compensates.

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 explicitly states the tool calculates total flow area (TFA) of bit nozzles, using a specific formula. It clearly distinguishes from siblings (which are numerous calculation tools) by naming a specific application.

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 usage for calculating nozzle TFA but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. Sibling tools include many other calculations, but no explicit recommendation is given.

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