volumetric_ogip

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full burden. It explains the calculation and parameter meanings but lacks disclosure of edge cases (e.g., porosity must be 0-1) or output format. The behavior is predictable but could be more explicit.

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 well-structured: formula first, then parameter list. It is concise but leaves a little room for improvement by mentioning the output unit (scf) explicitly instead of relying on the formula alone.

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 the output schema exists, the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the formula, all parameters, and their units. However, it could mention the output variable name or typical ranges for Bg.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining each parameter with units and range constraints (e.g., 'fraction, 0-1' for porosity and Sw). It adds value beyond the bare property names.

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 volumetric Original Gas In Place (OGIP), provides the full formula, and lists all parameters with explanations. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'volumetric_ooip' for oil.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention prerequisites. While the formula implies it's for gas reservoirs, no direct guidance is given for context or exclusion.

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