unit_convert

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It states conversion and lists all units, but does not disclose return format, error handling, or that it is a pure side-effect-free operation beyond the verb '换算'.

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 opens with a one-line purpose and then uses a dense, well-organized category/unit list. It is lengthy due to the exhaustive unit enumeration, but every item is necessary and nothing is wasted.

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 high complexity of units and no output schema, the description covers all supported categories and unit symbols plus temperature unit details. It does not explicitly explain how value/from/to relate or what the result looks like, but the schema fills the parameter relationship and return is implied for a converter.

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?

The schema only defines category with an enum and describes from/to as generic strings. The description adds enormous value by listing every valid unit string for each category and explaining temperature unit abbreviations, which is essential for correct invocation.

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 performs unit conversion (单位换算) and then exhaustively lists every supported category and unit. This specific verb+resource scope distinguishes it from sibling tools like color_convert or encode_*.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor any mention of alternatives. However, the tool's domain is so self-contained and the category list so complete that the intended use is implied: use when converting among the listed units.

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