calculate_force

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions inputs mass and acceleration and output force in newtons, but fails to explain the role of the force_n parameter in the schema. This omission creates ambiguity about whether it is an input or output.

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 only three sentences, front-loading the purpose and formula. No extraneous information, every sentence is efficient and relevant.

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 tool's simplicity and presence of an output schema, the description covers the core functionality but leaves the force_n parameter unexplained. The pointer to list_bundles adds some context. Overall, adequate but with a notable gap.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats parameter names and units from the schema without adding new meaning, and does not clarify the force_n parameter's purpose.

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 it computes force using Newton's second law (F=m·a) for physics problems. It specifies the formula and units, making the tool's purpose unmistakable and distinct from other physics 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 indicates 'Use for physics problems' and references list_bundles for related calculators, providing some guidance. However, it lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions, such as not using this tool for energy or momentum calculations.

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