calculate_freezer_duration

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 states what the tool returns but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as being read-only, idempotent, or requiring authentication. For a simple lookup, this may be adequate, but it lacks explicit transparency.

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 with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose immediately, making it 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?

Given the simple nature of the tool (one parameter, output schema exists), the description is minimally complete. However, it does not clarify the output format (e.g., units like days/months) or that it is a recommended duration. The output schema exists but the description could provide more context.

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 schema has one parameter with an enum but no descriptions (0% description coverage). The description adds no extra meaning beyond stating 'for a food type', which is already obvious from the schema. It fails to compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 'Return maximum recommended freezer storage duration for a food type', specifying the verb (return), resource (maximum recommended freezer storage duration), and the input (food type). It also distinguishes from siblings by mentioning related 'cuisine' calculators and referencing 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 advises to 'See list_bundles for related "cuisine" calculators', which implies when not to use this tool (if broader cuisine calculations are needed). This provides context on alternatives, though it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus others.

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