convert_temperature

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It claims 'direct input' is supported, but the schema requires file_name, file_type, and file_content, making file upload a mandatory path. This mismatch is misleading and not addressed. The description also does not disclose output format, default behavior, or error conditions.

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 short and front-loaded, with two sentences that state the core purpose and supported units. No filler is present, earning high marks for conciseness. However, key behavioral details are missing, so it is not a perfect 5.

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 six parameters, required file fields, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is under-specified. It fails to explain the two input modes, the mandatory nature of file parameters, how to choose between modes, or what the result looks like. A user or agent would have difficulty invoking this tool correctly based solely on the description.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters, including enums for units. The description adds no further parameter-level meaning and does not clarify how file_content, value, or from_unit/to_unit relate to the two claimed input modes. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the parameter documentation burden.

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 converts temperature units and identifies the supported units (Celsius and Fahrenheit). It distinguishes itself from the generic sibling 'calculate' by naming the specific resource and operation. However, it is slightly ambiguous about whether it converts file content, direct numeric input, or both.

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 gives context for when to use the tool: when converting temperatures, either from file content or direct input. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as using 'calculate' for other conversions or math. The guidance is present but not thorough.

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