subtract

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It correctly specifies the order of subtraction (second from first) but does not mention any behavioral traits like error handling, integer overflow, or return type, though the output schema likely covers the return type. The description is adequate for a simple pure function.

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 one sentence with no superfluous words. It is front-loaded and directly conveys the necessary information without waste.

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 tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema (as indicated by context signals), the description provides sufficient context for an agent to understand the operation. It could optionally mention that it returns an integer, but that is already covered by the 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, leaving parameters 'a' and 'b' without textual context. The description compensates by clarifying that 'a' is the first integer and 'b' is the second, establishing the order of subtraction. This adds meaningful semantic context 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 clearly states the operation: subtract the second integer from the first. The verb 'subtract' and the resource (two integers) are explicit, and it naturally distinguishes the tool from siblings like '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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. However, the tool is a basic arithmetic operation, so its usage context is implied. It does not mention alternatives or scenarios where other tools would be better, but the simplicity reduces the need for extensive guidelines.

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