calculate_operating_netback

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It does not disclose side effects, permissions, or whether it is a pure calculation. The formula is shown, but no behavioral context 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 concise: a one-line purpose, a formula, and an Args list. No wasted words, front-loaded with the key action.

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 7 parameters and an output schema (present but not shown), the description covers the calculation and key parameters. It does not discuss edge cases or output structure, but with output schema, this is acceptable. Could add assumptions like gas conversion factor rationale.

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 compensate. It lists all parameters with units and defaults for royalty_pct and transport_per_boe, but does not explain terms like BOE or opex_per_boe in depth. Adds some meaning but not fully comprehensive.

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 verb 'Calculate' and the specific resource 'operating netback per BOE', and provides the formula and conversion factor, distinguishing it from sibling tools like calculate_breakeven_price.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as calculate_breakeven_price or calculate_npv. The description only explains what the tool does, not the context in which it is appropriate.

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