calculate_distance_to_horizon

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

No annotations are provided. The description is straightforward and accurately describes the computation, but it does not disclose potential edge cases, unit restrictions, or any behavioral nuances beyond the basic calculation. With no annotations to contradict, the description is minimally adequate.

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, no redundancy. It front-loads the purpose and efficiently includes return format and a pointer to related tools.

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 simple tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential information: what it does, what it returns, and a reference for related calculators. No gaps are evident.

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 has 100% description coverage for the single parameter (height_m). The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score 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 the verb and resource: 'Calculate the distance to the horizon from a given height.' It also specifies the output keys (distance_km, distance_miles, distance_nautical_miles). This distinguishes it from sibling calculator tools.

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 calculating horizon distance but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions related calculators via list_bundles but does not define exclusions or when-not-to-use.

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