calculate_body_fat

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It transparently names the Deurenberg equation and specifies the output (body_fat_pct). It lacks disclosure of limitations, assumptions, or accuracy considerations for special populations, which is a gap for a health estimation tool.

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: two sentences that front-load the main purpose and inputs, then state the output and provide a pointer to related tools. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 calculator with an output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, equation, and output. It references 'list_bundles' for related tools, adding context. It could mention known limitations or formula source, but overall it is sufficient given the output schema existence.

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 already provides full descriptions for all three parameters (BMI, age, sex) with constraints, achieving 100% schema coverage. The description adds marginal value by naming the Deurenberg equation, implying how parameters are combined, but does not elaborate 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 tool estimates body fat percentage using the Deurenberg equation, with inputs BMI, age, and sex, and outputs a single value. It distinguishes itself from the sibling 'calculate_body_fat_navy' by naming the specific equation and referencing related calculators via 'list_bundles'.

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 usage for estimating body fat from BMI, age, and sex via the Deurenberg equation. It provides an alternative by directing to 'list_bundles' for related 'sante' calculators, offering contextual guidance. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or exclude scenarios.

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