calculate_area

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry the burden. It mentions input and output (returns area in input-units squared) but lacks details on error handling, shape validation, or limitations like precision. Adequate but not thorough.

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 concise sentences that front-load the core functionality and add strategic context (use cases, pointer to list_bundles). No unnecessary 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 the complexity (10 parameters, many shapes) and the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description covers basic usage and return format. Missing shape-specific parameter guidance (e.g., which dimensions needed for each shape), but overall sufficient for a simple calculation tool.

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?

Input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, and the description only adds generic 'shape + dimensions' which is redundant. No additional meaning or hints 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?

Clearly states the tool computes area for 2D shapes, lists common examples, and mentions use cases. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like calculate_volume or calculate_perimeter, though the specific verb+resource ('compute area') is clear.

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?

Provides context for when to use (geometry, real estate, paint estimates) and references list_bundles for related calculators. Does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives, but the guidance is clear.

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