calculate_add_hours

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic operation without mentioning any constraints, side effects, or edge cases such as overflow, validation beyond schema, or return format specifics. This is insufficient for a tool with zero annotations.

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 extremely concise with two sentences. The first sentence front-loads the main action, and the second provides a helpful pointer to related tools. Every sentence adds value with no wasted words.

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?

The tool has a low complexity (simple addition) and an output schema (context signals indicate true), so the description need not detail return values. However, it lacks any additional context about expected input ranges (e.g., maximum hours) or behavior beyond the schema. It is minimally adequate.

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% (all parameters have descriptions in the schema). The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides; it merely restates the function of summing durations. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema covers parameter meaning.

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: 'Add two time durations and return the total in hours and minutes.' The verb 'Add' and resource 'time durations' are specific, and the tool is well-distinguished from the many sibling calculation tools.

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 implies the use case (adding durations) and references related tools via 'list_bundles', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or when not to use it. No exclusions or conditions are provided.

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