calculate_heat_pump_cop

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

The description claims inputs are 'heat output kW' and 'electric input kW', but the actual schema expects 'outdoor_temp' and 'indoor_temp'. This is a direct contradiction with the provided schema, severely misleading the agent.

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 short but inaccurate. It front-loads purpose but fails to provide correct parameter information, making it not earn its place due to misleading content.

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 output schema exists, the description does not need to detail returns, but it inaccurately describes inputs. With two parameters and full schema coverage, the description should align but does not, making it incomplete in a harmful way.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description's mention of non-existent parameters (heat output, electric input) directly contradicts the schema parameters (temperatures). It adds negative value and undermines understanding.

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 COP for HVAC efficiency analysis, which is a specific verb-resource pair. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like calculate_pump_power, though it suggests related calculators via 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 provides a usage context ('Use for HVAC efficiency analysis') but does not specify when to avoid it or mention alternative tools. It only hints at related calculators via list_bundles.

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