calculate_caffeine_clearance

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 discloses the key assumption of a 5-hour half-life and states the output includes remaining mg and clearance forecast. However, it does not mention precision, default units for time, or whether the model is simplified, leaving some behavioral gaps.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and key detail (half-life). Every sentence adds value, with no unnecessary words. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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 an output schema (not shown) and the description mentions the output includes 'remaining mg and clearance forecast', which provides a high-level understanding. For a simple calculation, this is nearly complete, though it could explicitly state the output format (e.g., object keys). The reference to list_bundles adds extra context for users seeking more.

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 both parameters (mg, hours). The description adds minimal value by reiterating 'caffeine mg, time since intake' but does not explain any constraints beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already documents the parameters well.

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 remaining caffeine in the body over time using a 5-hour half-life, specifically for sleep planning. It includes the verb 'compute' and the resource 'caffeine clearance', making the purpose unmistakable and distinct from sibling tools like calculate_caffeine_half_life.

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 explicitly recommends use for 'sleep planning', providing clear context for when to use. It does not explicitly state when not to use or differentiate from related siblings, but it does direct to list_bundles for related 'sante' calculators, offering some guidance on alternatives.

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