calculate_braquet

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

The description mentions 'wheel diameter mm' as an input, but this parameter is absent from the input schema, creating a serious inconsistency. It does not disclose computational behavior or side effects beyond the basic function, and no annotations are provided.

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 concise with three sentences, front-loading the main purpose. The reference to 'list_bundles' is somewhat extraneous but not overly verbose.

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 description omits the required 'wheel diameter' parameter from the schema, leaving the agent confused. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'calculate_gear_ratio'. Output description is minimal and lacks structure details.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for the two existing parameters. However, the description adds a non-existent parameter ('wheel diameter mm'), which misleads the agent. The description does not add useful semantic value 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 computes cycling gear ratio and development per pedal turn, specifying it is for road cycling gear analysis. It mentions the outputs, which helps distinguish from other calculators.

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 use for road cycling gear analysis and points to 'list_bundles' for related calculators, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like 'calculate_gear_ratio'.

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