volumetric_ooip

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

With no annotations, description provides the formula and parameter meanings, disclosing key behavioral aspects. However, it lacks notes on assumptions, units, or constraints beyond parameter names.

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?

Very concise: formula and parameter list in a few lines. Every sentence adds value, no repetition or fluff.

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?

Well-explained inputs and formula, but missing explicit mention of output (OOIP in STB) which is presumably in output schema. Adequate for a simple calculator with output schema present.

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 has 0% description coverage; description compensates fully with clear explanations for all 5 parameters, including units and valid ranges (e.g., fraction 0-1 for porosity and Sw).

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?

Description clearly states 'Calculate volumetric Original Oil In Place (OOIP).' with explicit formula, distinguishing it from sibling tools like volumetric_ogip for gas.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., volumetric_ogip, material balance methods). It does not specify prerequisites or contexts.

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