Convert date

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the bar is low; the description still adds real value by disclosing the conversion source and warning that the Hijri result may differ by a day from Saudi Arabia's reckoning. That accuracy caveat is exactly the kind of nuance annotations cannot convey.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and followed by a single high-value caveat. Nothing is padded or repeated from the title.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description should clarify what comes back, yet it never says whether one converted date or all three calendar equivalents are returned. For a simple two-parameter tool that is the main remaining gap; everything else needed to call it is covered.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters, including the enum of calendars and the date format example, are documented in the schema itself. The description restates the calendar set but adds no format, default, or edge-case semantics beyond it, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb (convert) plus the resource (a date) and enumerates the three calendars involved, so the operation is unambiguous. It also names the backing source (time.ir's own converter), which separates it from a generic arithmetic tool like ti_date_difference.

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 purpose implies when to reach for it (translating a date across calendars), but there is no explicit when-not guidance and no sibling is named as an alternative. The second sentence is a data caveat rather than routing guidance, so usage must be inferred.

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