calculate_anything

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 only mentions 'AI-powered' and the subscription requirement, but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether it is read-only, error handling, latency, or rate limits. For a generative AI tool, more transparency is needed.

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 sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the tool's function and noting the subscription requirement. 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?

Given that an output schema exists (as per context signals), the description does not need to detail return values. It covers the core purpose and a key requirement. However, it could hint at the breadth of calculations to set expectations better.

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%, with both parameters having descriptions in the JSON schema. The description adds little beyond stating it is a 'universal calculator', so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 it is a 'universal AI-powered calculator' for 'any calculation not covered by specialized tools', which distinguishes it from the many sibling tools. The verb 'handles' and resource 'calculation' are specific.

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 clear when-to-use guidance ('not covered by specialized tools') and a prerequisite ('Requires premium subscription'). It does not explicitly list alternatives, but given the hundreds of sibling tools, the implication to use them first is clear.

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