calculate_led_savings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It lists inputs and outputs ('Returns yearly savings') but does not disclose any behavioral traits like side effects or limitations. For a calculation tool, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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 core purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, usage, inputs/output, and a reference to related tools. No wasted words.

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 (so return format is covered), the description sufficiently covers what the tool does, its inputs, output ('yearly savings'), and usage context. It is complete for a simple calculation tool.

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 the description mirrors parameter names without adding deeper semantics beyond the schema descriptions. It lists inputs but provides no new context beyond what's already in the schema.

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 specific verb 'Compute' and the resource 'energy and money saved by switching from incandescent/halogen to LED', making the tool's purpose distinct from siblings like calculate_electricity_cost. It also directs to list_bundles for related calculators, further differentiating it.

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 explicit context: 'Use for energy audit.' It also references list_bundles for alternatives, guiding the agent on when to use this tool vs. other calculators. However, it does not state explicit when-not-to-use scenarios.

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