subtract

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

No annotations are present, so the description is the sole source of behavioral transparency. It clearly discloses the exact arithmetic operation, the operand order, and that the result is returned. For this simple pure computation, this covers the relevant behavioral traits.

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 a single sentence that front-loads the operation and formula with no filler. Every phrase contributes to understanding what the tool does.

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?

For a tool with only two simple numeric parameters, fully documented schema, and no side effects, the description provides everything needed to call it correctly. The explicit (a - b) formula and return statement make the behavior complete without requiring an output schema.

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?

Both parameters are fully documented in the input schema with clear meanings ('first number', 'second number'), so schema coverage is 100% and the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the order by stating b is subtracted from a, but adds no materially new information beyond the schema.

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 uses the precise verb 'Subtract' with the explicit operand order ('second number from the first') and the formula (a - b), making the operation unambiguous. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings add, multiply, and divide.

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?

There is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus add, multiply, or divide. The operation name and formula imply it should be chosen when a difference is needed, but no exclusions or alternative-routing guidance are provided.

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