convert_currency

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose that conversion uses the CBR exchange rate. However, it does not mention date handling, default currencies, or limitations such as unsupported currency codes, relying on the schema for those details.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence conveys the core action and rate source with zero wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 simple conversion tool with fully documented parameters, the description is nearly complete: it states the conversion, the source rate, and the currencies. It could mention the return value, but that is strongly implied by the conversion action.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds little to parameter meaning beyond saying that an amount is converted between currencies, but this is not needed because the schema already documents all four parameters.

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 names a specific operation (converting an amount), a resource (currency amounts), and the rate source (CBR RF). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling rate-retrieval tools like get_currency_rate and get_daily_rates.

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 clearly implies use for currency conversion rather than rate lookup, so an agent can select it over siblings. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is unambiguous.

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