convert_currency

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively explains key behaviors: the tool uses ECB reference rates, supports EUR-based conversions and triangulation, works with latest or historical rates, and handles specific date queries. However, it doesn't mention error conditions, rate limits, or authentication requirements.

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 perfectly structured and concise. It starts with a clear purpose statement, provides operational details in a compact format, and includes helpful examples that demonstrate real-world usage without unnecessary elaboration. Every sentence serves a clear purpose.

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 conversion tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides strong context about the ECB source, triangulation method, and date handling. The examples effectively illustrate usage patterns. However, without an output schema, some information about return format would be helpful, though the examples partially compensate.

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 four parameters thoroughly. The description adds some context about currency code examples and the date parameter's default behavior, but doesn't provide significant additional semantic value beyond what's in the schema descriptions.

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's purpose with specific verbs ('convert an amount between currencies') and resources ('using ECB reference rates'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'get_exchange_rates' by focusing on conversion rather than rate retrieval, and explicitly mentions the triangulation method for cross-currency conversions.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool through the examples section, which shows it answers conversion questions. It also implicitly distinguishes from siblings by not being for retrieving datasets, exchange rates, or other financial data, making it clear this is for conversion operations specifically.

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